Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Have you ever had anything positive to comment? I've always noticed all the pessimistic posts man :p

Isn't lightpeak supposed to be backward compatible with usb/usb 2, etc?? :confused:

It's the actual physical interface that is different also.

You can't simply plug a usb cable into a lightpeak port. You would need an adapter.
 
Those of you predicting or hoping for 4 cores . . .
You need to look at Intel's roadmap . . . those processors don't exist in mobile variants . . . unless you want a 2 inch thick Macbook Pro

Somehow, I just don't see Apple putting one of those on the market.

I just really want to know if the new i7 'mobile' processors are going to be faster than the current line of processors given that they're more than 500mhz slower on the clock side of things

You are totally wrong.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-i7-Notebook-Processor-Clarksfield.21025.0.html
 
Apple didn't really back USB until the major PC manufacturers and companies had already decided to push it as the universal standard to replace the likes of the Parallel port, Serial port, etc.

And desktop computers existed before Apple. Apple simply pushed them in a much more consumer-friendly manner than had been done before (and don't get me wrong, it's a major kudos to Steve Jobs and the rest for getting it done).

What I meant is that Apple was the first to completely ditch the legacy connectors.


A lot of people could also make the argument that they'd rather have that "space" wasted by a legacy connector so that they can potentially access one of those old technologies, vs. "wasting the space" on a port that will likely never see any major use and be phased out very quickly (think PCI-X).

I'm sorry, but one of the best things that came about from Apple migrating to Intel-based systems is that they're finally relatively in parity with the rest of the PC industry. Spew all the hate about PCs that you want, but it was the PC manufacturers, and not Apple, that typically drove the success of new standards (PCI-e, USB, SATA, etc.). Now that Apple works so closely with Intel, they can properly help drive those standards as well.

At the same time though, Lightpeak will only succeed if everyone else jumps on it as well.

Most LPT1 printers dont even have drivers for XP.
 

O RLY?

On 23rd of September Intel presented its new Core i7 Quad Core processors for high-end notebooks. The three introduced CPUs should replace the mobile Quad Core processors and therefore only suited for big laptops. Technically, they are relatively low clocked desktop Core i7 CPUs with a higher built-in over-clock option.

In the PC world, this usually means extremely thick & hot laptops.
With low battery life - right?

I would love to see Apple throw 4 cores into a 17" MBP, but I just dont find it feasible yet given how freakish Apple is about maintaining slimness, weight and not burning your nuts off . . .

OK, my wording was a bit hyperbolic.
What I should have said was:

"You need to look at Intel's roadmap . . . 4-core Arrandale don't exist . . . hotter, power-hungry versions of i7 exist but probably wont ever fit into Apple's MBPs design"

However, I would love Apple prove me wrong.
 
O RLY?

On 23rd of September Intel presented its new Core i7 Quad Core processors for high-end notebooks. The three introduced CPUs should replace the mobile Quad Core processors and therefore only suited for big laptops. Technically, they are relatively low clocked desktop Core i7 CPUs with a higher built-in over-clock option.

In the PC world, this usually means extremely thick & hot laptops.
With low battery life - right?

I would love to see Apple throw 4 cores into a 17" MBP, but I just dont find it feasible yet given how freakish Apple is about maintaining slimness, weight and not burning your nuts off . . .

OK, my wording was a bit hyperbolic.
What I should have said was:

"You need to look at Intel's roadmap . . . 4-core Arrandale don't exist . . . hotter, power-hungry versions of i7 exist but probably wont ever fit into Apple's MBPs design"

However, I would love Apple prove me wrong.

they just might remember intel making that chip with the macbook air in mind.

giggady
 

O RLY?

On 23rd of September Intel presented its new Core i7 Quad Core processors for high-end notebooks. The three introduced CPUs should replace the mobile Quad Core processors and therefore only suited for big laptops. Technically, they are relatively low clocked desktop Core i7 CPUs with a higher built-in over-clock option.

In the PC world, this usually means extremely thick & hot laptops.
With low battery life - right?

I would love to see Apple throw 4 cores into a 17" MBP, but I just dont find it feasible yet given how freakish Apple is about maintaining slimness, weight and not burning your nuts off . . .

OK, my wording was a bit hyperbolic.
What I should have said was:

"You need to look at Intel's roadmap . . . 4-core Arrandale don't exist . . . hotter, power-hungry versions of i7 exist but probably wont ever fit into Apple's MBPs design"

However, I would love Apple prove me wrong.



Apple will never trade design for processing power that's for sure...They won't use processors that require thicker bodies than that of the current MB and MBP line.. They're most likely to reduce a little the power if they "figure out a way" to reduce the Air thickness and make the MBP as slim as the Air...
 
Windows sales will not be good if apple gets its entire line refreshed before Christmas. Besides the new models, people would buy the current ones as the price would go cheaper...

On 24th Nov :apple: please!
 
Why does technology move so fast?!!

I just bought a 13" Macbook Pro so I was wondering just how much better the new Macbook Pros are going to be? If they are going to be a lot better for the same price, I might send this one back and wait for the new ones. Would this be a good/ bad idea :confused:? The specs of mine are 2.25Ghz, 4Gb ram, 320 Gb hard drive. :apple:
 
I just bought a 13" Macbook Pro so I was wondering just how much better the new Macbook Pros are going to be? If they are going to be a lot better for the same price, I might send this one back and wait for the new ones. Would this be a good/ bad idea :confused:? The specs of mine are 2.25Ghz, 4Gb ram, 320 Gb hard drive. :apple:

1. For email, web surfing, word processing and watching videos and listening to music you might not notice the difference.

2. If you're PS photo editing, video editing, doing 3D or motion graphics for a living, maybe 20-30% faster.

If 1, you're good to go. If 2, it might be worth it to return it. Your call. Good luck.
 
Those of you predicting or hoping for 4 cores . . .
You need to look at Intel's roadmap . . . those processors don't exist in mobile variants . . . unless you want a 2 inch thick Macbook Pro

Somehow, I just don't see Apple putting one of those on the market.

I just really want to know if the new i7 'mobile' processors are going to be faster than the current line of processors given that they're more than 500mhz slower on the clock side of things

Yes they do. Please try not to misinform people if you're not sure what you're talking about.

Even with the lower maximum clock speeds they will be significantly faster due to a number of factors, mostly because of a new memory controller, amongst other things.

If a two inch MacPro would truly have "professional" components and not just a "Pro" name, then yes, I would gladly give Apple my money for an opportunity to buy one. The only people I know who don't have the strength or will to carry a 2", gasp, laptop are todlers.
 
300 hundred comments about how :apple: cant make a quad-core lap top
and if they do you will get roasted nuts... guess people found a new God to pray to :D
 
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

Why? They're becoming available from other manufacturers.
 
Major Case Redesign

Let's all keep in mind that a switch to 16:9 aspect ratio would require a major case redesign. Considering that the MBPs just got a major case redesign with the introduction of integrated batteries, it seems soon for another.

However, if Apple were to offer a 13" (or smaller) model with 1600x900 (or higher) resolution, then I would buy one regardless of other features.
 
Here's your new MacBook Pro with quad core processors. Enjoy! ;)

I notice there are a good bit of vents on that fellow. I wonder how loud it is in normal operation. Many years back I had an HP zd7000 "desktop replacement" 17" with a 3.4GHz Northwood P4 and when I stressed it, it was louder than the traffic whizzing by on I-405 to keep that fellow cool (and this was a Northwood, mind you, not a Prescott/"PressHot").

Also, is that 7 hours of battery life gained when just using both 6-cell primary battery pack, or does it require both that pack in unison with the 9-cell auxiliary battery pack?
 
"Tuesday" is actually an inside joke, stemming from the fact that over the years many posters have claimed, with varying degrees of accuracy, that the release of a new PowerBook or MB was imminent, coming as soon as next Tuesday. Now it's a bit of a running gag . . . ;)

It's the new PowerBook G5.

End thread.

:p:p:p

Seriously though, you won't be seeing it this year. A few moments ago Apple confirmed that "the holiday lineup is set". Meanwhile, I'm probably gonna be buying a 15"/17" MacBook Pro tomorrow - just gotta decide between the 2 - the 1920x1200 resolution is so tempting... :D
 
2011-2012. USB3 has been delayed a year.
I keep hearing this but USB 3.0 motherboards are still coming out next month.

In the PC world, this usually means extremely thick & hot laptops.
With low battery life - right?

I would love to see Apple throw 4 cores into a 17" MBP, but I just dont find it feasible yet given how freakish Apple is about maintaining slimness, weight and not burning your nuts off . . .
I think you should take a look at the current Clarksfield notebooks first.
 
It's very confusing with all the conflicting news. :confused: Hard to know what to believe. We might get some clues with announcements about USB 3 devices.
Gigabyte is pushing out P55 and X58 revision boards with USB 3.0 and SATA 3 next month.

I keep hearing 2011 because of Intel but there are products still coming out in 2009 with the support.
 
Gigabyte is pushing out P55 and X58 revision boards with USB 3.0 and SATA 3 next month.

I keep hearing 2011 because of Intel but there are products still coming out in 2009 with the support.

I hope you're right. Here's some news today.

http://www.twice.com/article/366426-Dane_Elec_Readies_Drives_For_Nov_USB_3_0_Launch.php

And about the Gigabyte mobo.

http://icrontic.com/news/gigabyte-adds-sata-6gbps-and-usb-3-0

Seems the hold up is not with mobo manufacturers, but the Intel chipsets.

http://www.eetimes.com/news/design/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=220700486
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.