Why should Apple keep up with Intel's roadmap?

[Frogurt]

Actualy it was 24 days ago

Announced on Spetember 6th. That's where I was figuring from.

 

[Veritas&Equitas]

apple has been converting people based on os x, despite years of performance inferior hardware, which is itself rather impressive.

Yes, but that's because it didn't have a similarly equipped PC processor so no one could know the difference ("G3, G4, G5, PPC: What the hell is that?") as opposed to now, where it's the exact same chip, with it's name and speed broadcasted for the world to know, compare, and analyze.

 

[CommonMan]

I lost track. Last time I checked, Apple had the fastest processor sold in consumer computers. Has that changed?

 

[bearbo]

No, I was counntering the point that people should buy by what is "enough." If you look at need, no one needs a 911, they just want a 911. And I actually said that Apple is a luxury brand, like Porsche.

but current mbp w/ yonah is not just what is enough, it's actually far beyond enough, esp for average ppl

True, but Apple doesn't really compete in industrial settings. But such settings don't constitute a majority of users. More are in homes and offices where they are used for word processing, spreadsheets, internet, music and e-mail. I didn't say that Mac users are more experienced, just that I guessed they would use more computing power.

no, mac users dont use more computing powers. some mac users, need higher processing power for photo and video editing, but there are PC users do number crunching, etc
mac user use more computing power is a biased statement (however, mac user do more photo/video editing might not be)

True, I was making that assumption in those numbers. Apple could just as easily delay Penryn for an extended period of time and always be on a cycle of half a step behind. But do you think that is a good business model?

i dont think apple skip chips is a bad business model, if they release every other chip, or every major releases, then it's probably a better business model than some other computer manufactures. given that every change in production line is costy

Again, probably true. But no one is buying a computer while standing in the street. They are at their computer looking at websites or standing in a store looking at signs. Where the information is presented.

if you ask them whether c2d is better than cd, they might have an idea, but if they dont know anything, walk into apple store and want a laptop, are they gonna ask the sales person, 'when's c2d out?'... you might know the diff between c2d and cd, w/o the immediate need of buying a laptop (thus research at last min), but again u might not be an average computer user

 

[Veritas&Equitas]

I lost track. Last time I checked, Apple had the fastest processor sold in consumer computers. Has that changed?

Yes, it has. Competitors are now selling laptops with the new Intel Core 2 Duo chips, Merom.

 

[Frogurt]

but current mbp w/ yonah is not just what is enough, it's actually far beyond enough, esp for average ppl

You are still missing my point which is that consumers make purchases based upon a desire to have something better, even if they don't need it. To go back to the Porsche analogy, a Boxster's abilities are far beyond what most people could use daily, so why the need for a 911? Because people want more, even beyond more. To further spell it out... the year old Dell w/ Pentium M is the Kia, the CD MB is the Boxster, the CD MBP is 911 and the C2D MBP is the 911 Turbo. The Dell/Kia is enough for most people, but people still want a 911 Turbo.
The post I was responding to was trying to make the case that people should just buy the MBP because it is "enough." Besides the obvious flaw in what is enough, it doesn't make sense to tell a person standing in a store that they should pay the same price for a computer which is slower than a competitor because it is "enough." People will always want the faster, better, bigger thing.

no, mac users dont use more computing powers. some mac users, need higher processing power for photo and video editing, but there are PC users do number crunching, etc
mac user use more computing power is a biased statement (however, mac user do more photo/video editing might not be)

I think we have different ideas of what average means, but it was just a guess and a very minor point.

i dont think apple skip chips is a bad business model, if they release every other chip, or every major releases, then it's probably a better business model than some other computer manufactures. given that every change in production line is costy

First I would point out that the change from Yonah to Merom would probably pay for itself in less than 1000 computers. The only things that need to be changed would be things like labels and tracking software. The chip drops in right where Yonah does. No machines need to be changed, no workers retrained, nothing. Second, your idea only works if they make more money by not upgrading than they woud through increased sales. Which could be true, but is it really likely? By skipping Intel release cycles, they are actually moving to slower updates than they had with PowerPC. Yonah to Penryn will be almost 2 years without a redesign, increase in speed or adding of features. Or Yonah to Santa Rosa would be 1.25. That will affect their sales.
Edit: And with Apple's track record, those lack of updates would be accompanied by no drop in price.

if you ask them whether c2d is better than cd, they might have an idea, but if they dont know anything, walk into apple store and want a laptop, are they gonna ask the sales person, 'when's c2d out?'... you might know the diff between c2d and cd, w/o the immediate need of buying a laptop (thus research at last min), but again u might not be an average computer user

That only applies to people in Apple stores. Every other computer and electronics store I have been to has multiple brands with signs stating specs. Its not a do I wait for C2D MBP, its a do I buy a Sony C2D or an Apple CD? That's how most people operate. And salesmen at the stores will be telling people that C2D is better.

 

[bearbo]

You are still missing my point which is that consumers make purchases based upon a desire to have something better, even if they don't need it. To go back to the Porsche analogy, a Boxster's abilities are far beyond what most people could use daily, so why the need for a 911? Because people want more, even beyond more. To further spell it out... the year old Dell w/ Pentium M is the Kia, the CD MB is the Boxster, the CD MBP is 911 and the C2D MBP is the 911 Turbo. The Dell/Kia is enough for most people, but people still want a 911 Turbo. The post I was responding to was trying to make the case that people should just buy the MBP because it is "enough." Besides the obvious flaw in what is enough, it doesn't make sense to tell a person standing in a store that they should pay the same price for a computer which is slower than a competitor because it is "enough." People will always want the faster, better, bigger thing.

people want the best available, which is understandable... and currently CD MBP is the best available, hence the 911 turbo equivalent doesn't even come into the equation..

First I would point out that the change from Yonah to Merom would probably pay for itself in less than 1000 computers. The only things that need to be changed would be things like labels and tracking software. The chip drops in right where Yonah does. No machines need to be changed, no workers retrained, nothing. Second, your idea only works if they make more money by not upgrading than they woud through increased sales. Which could be true, but is it really likely? By skipping Intel release cycles, they are actually moving to slower updates than they had with PowerPC. Yonah to Penryn will be almost 2 years without a redesign, increase in speed or adding of features. Or Yonah to Santa Rosa would be 1.25. That will affect their sales.
Edit: And with Apple's track record, those lack of updates would be accompanied by no drop in price.

you forgot about testing, as much as it seems apple is not doing it, it's something they have to do.
you seem to think it's extremely simple for something to change something in a process, it's not.. if you have ever seen a semiconductor production line, you'd know it's not as easy as you think.

skipping intel release cycles will not hurt sale, if people knows what they expect, aka if you know they aren't coming out w/ a new chip until a yr later, and you are kinda shopping, youd probably get the one they have now.

and apple does have price drop sometimes even if they don't update

That only applies to people in Apple stores. Every other computer and electronics store I have been to has multiple brands with signs stating specs. Its not a do I wait for C2D MBP, its a do I buy a Sony C2D or an Apple CD? That's how most people operate. And salesmen at the stores will be telling people that C2D is better.

a lot mac users are addicted to mac, namely, addicted to OS X.. they probably wouldn't change vendors easily

i dare say most mac users are addicted to mac, that is, if they are in store for mac, they are not gonna get a PC just because it has CD instead of C2D
that is not to say they dont use PC, but they dont see them as equivalent per say

 

[jaduffy108]

Here is what you are missing. There is nothing new yet.

If you want an Apple notebook, you have the choice between a CD MB, or CD MBP.

There is no '2007' model also know as a Merom upgrade. So yes, you pay full price for current tech.

If you are not bound to Apple products, then by all means you can use the '2006 vs. 2007' analogy. Because it would make sense.

But for someone who only uses Apple computers, that doesnt work.

### <deep breath> Duh.
This thread is specifically about Apple not offering the latest and greatest from Intel in laptops compared to Dell, Sony, Alienware, HP, etc, etc. I guess if Apple was still offering G4 PPC with 133 FSB laptops, you would say the same thing? yowsa. The Mac Pro rocks. The iMac is cool..and UPDATED with merom. Why is it unreasonable for people who need mobility to want current tech in the machine of their choice? Why is it unreasonable for those people to feel cheated by paying the price of the new tech for old tech? It isn't *really* important. It's a computer.

What does it say when someone uses phrases like "bound to Apple products" and "only uses Apple computers"??? I'm staying away from the koolaid. Apple isn't saving the world or even particularly humanitarian, so I just don't "get" the (mindless) fanaticism in these forums. It's a computer!

 

[Frogurt]

people want the best available, which is understandable... and currently CD MBP is the best available, hence the 911 turbo equivalent doesn't even come into the equation..

But say a competing Maserati or Aston Martin would be available. So a person who only wants a certain performance could go to one of them. But for someone who only wants a 911 Turbo, they won't just settle for a 911. Either way, Porsche doesn't make a sale. Similarly here, someone who just wants the best performance (C2D) doesn't have an Apple option and someone who wants a C2D MBP Apple can't buy one. Either way, Apple doesn't make a sale.

you forgot about testing, as much as it seems apple is not doing it, it's something they have to do.
you seem to think it's extremely simple for something to change something in a process, it's not.. if you have ever seen a semiconductor production line, you'd know it's not as easy as you think.

First, a computer assembly plant is not a semiconductor line, nice try to slip that in. Second, what huge amounts of testing are you talking about? Name a spec besides performance that has changed.
Heat-nope
Chip dimensions-nope
Pins-nope
Motherboard-nope
Chipset-nope
Minor testing yes, but any such testing could piggyback off the iMac testing. The major costs in changing production are changing equipment, retraining employees, and loss of productivity, none of which would be significant. Let's look at Sony, who is also very good at making money and has a comparable laptop market share to Apple. If it cost huges amounts to re-engineer their laptops versus sales, Sony would not have done it.

skipping intel release cycles will not hurt sale, if people knows what they expect, aka if you know they aren't coming out w/ a new chip until a yr later, and you are kinda shopping, youd probably get the one they have now.

and apple does have price drop sometimes even if they don't update

a lot mac users are addicted to mac, namely, addicted to OS X.. they probably wouldn't change vendors easily

i dare say most mac users are addicted to mac, that is, if they are in store for mac, they are not gonna get a PC just because it has CD instead of C2D
that is not to say they dont use PC, but they dont see them as equivalent per say

You contradict yourself... people will wait if they know that releases will be delayed, but most consumers don't bother to learn anything? Which is it?

All of your arguments only apply to those committed to OS X/Mac. The growth Apple is seeing is not coming from people who are already Mac users. They are Windows converts and new computer users. Some are people switching based solely on OSX, but if you look at the PowerPC years (which also had OSX), Apple was at best maintaining users. Now that Apple has comparable hardware they are gaining. If they don't have products in the future which are seen as comparable by potential new customers, they won't see the same kind of growth. And less growth = lost sales = less money.

Overall I think that is the point you are not getting. There are other people considering Apple besides current users. You may be addicted to Mac, but few other consumers are. Apple stands to make a great deal of money off new customers and putting out outdated products won't get it done. Apple saw this in the past, hence Bootcamp, Switch campaign, Intel switch.

 

[bearbo]

But say a competing Maserati or Aston Martin would be available. So a person who only wants a certain performance could go to one of them. But for someone who only wants a 911 Turbo, they won't just settle for a 911. Either way, Porsche doesn't make a sale. Similarly here, someone who just wants the best performance (C2D) doesn't have an Apple option and someone who wants a C2D MBP Apple can't buy one. Either way, Apple doesn't make a sale.

but the problem is, 911 and turbo actually have significant difference, while the difference between m. and y. at this point (in the sense of lack of benchmark, and lack of santa rosa) is questionable.

First, a computer assembly plant is not a semiconductor line, nice try to slip that in. Second, what huge amounts of testing are you talking about? Name a spec besides performance that has changed.
Heat-nope
Chip dimensions-nope
Pins-nope
Motherboard-nope
Chipset-nope
Minor testing yes, but any such testing could piggyback off the iMac testing. The major costs in changing production are changing equipment, retraining employees, and loss of productivity, none of which would be significant. Let's look at Sony, who is also very good at making money and has a comparable laptop market share to Apple. If it cost huges amounts to re-engineer their laptops versus sales, Sony would not have done it.

1st, you can't judge apple's business model based on Sony's, we all know those dont implement even close to similar strategy.
you know there's no difference between the heating from the 2 chips?
i agree with you that the testing could be piggyback off the iMac testing... provided there is no problem arise... what if some thing DOES go wrong? you know, that's kind of the point for testing
it might be a bit comparable to imac, but not really... iMac never had mooing problem, over heat problem, random shut down, battery this, battery that...

and just btw, a assembly line is very similar (in the macro sense) to a semiconductor production line, what makes you think they aren't (i actually want to know the answer to this question)

You contradict yourself... people will wait if they know that releases will be delayed, but most consumers don't bother to learn anything? Which is it?

i don't contradict myself. i'm saying average, not so techy consumers won't do much research about the computer they buy (they do a bit, not much) if their family have a tradition of using mac, they'd natually go to their fav mac store and get a mac (i'll get to PC in a bit), they won't be obsessed with C2D

Prosumer (i cant believe im using this term), if they know the line won't be updated for a yr, they won't wait for that either, however, they'd wait if there's a month... so if apple constantly release stuff once a yr or two, they effectively decrease the number of those "months" right before releases, therefore increase sales

now if you are someone who's on the edge between PC and Mac, you'd probably look at the price, spec and OS.. if the priceis more important, you won't choose mac either way, if the latter is more imporant, well, you'd choose mac
(and all the above options are independent whether apple release new processors constantly)

i admit there are then a lot of ppl who would be weighing between OS and price and specs.. then the smarter ones would realize that the specs aren't THAT different, sure the price is different, so then it ultimately again, go between OS and price.. as in, do you think the OS worth that much?

nobody buys mac JUST because the specs.

All of your arguments only apply to those committed to OS X/Mac. The growth Apple is seeing is not coming from people who are already Mac users. They are Windows converts and new computer users. Some are people switching based solely on OSX, but if you look at the PowerPC years (which also had OSX), Apple was at best maintaining users. Now that Apple has comparable hardware they are gaining. If they don't have products in the future which are seen as comparable by potential new customers, they won't see the same kind of growth. And less growth = lost sales = less money.

Overall I think that is the point you are not getting. There are other people considering Apple besides current users. You may be addicted to Mac, but few other consumers are. Apple stands to make a great deal of money off new customers and putting out outdated products won't get it done. Apple saw this in the past, hence Bootcamp, Switch campaign, Intel switch.

 

[Frogurt]

but the problem is, 911 and turbo actually have significant difference, while the difference between m. and y. at this point (in the sense of lack of benchmark, and lack of santa rosa) is questionable.

The 911 to Turbo analogy was a bad one to begin with. It is much closer to the 996 vs 997. An incremental change with an increase in performance. And yes, Merom has shown itself to perform better than Yonah. Early benchmarks were of pre-production chips. Current benchmarks show a measurable difference.

1st, you can't judge apple's business model based on Sony's, we all know those dont implement even close to similar strategy.
you know there's no difference between the heating from the 2 chips?
i agree with you that the testing could be piggyback off the iMac testing... provided there is no problem arise... what if some thing DOES go wrong? you know, that's kind of the point for testing
it might be a bit comparable to imac, but not really... iMac never had mooing problem, over heat problem, random shut down, battery this, battery that...

Heat, yes, again current benchmarks, as opposed to ones on preproduction, show negligible heat change. More akin to a hot processor vs a cool one of the same type. Apple and Sony don't have the same market strategy, but they do operate under the same cost constraints. Especially when it comes to manufacturing. Very few companies actually make their own computers. Apple doesn't.
The Macbook problems are all the more reason why Apple wouldn't skip an update. They get to replace a problematics product with a better one.

and just btw, a assembly line is very similar (in the macro sense) to a semiconductor production line, what makes you think they aren't (i actually want to know the answer to this question)

The major difference is the allowable error is much larger. Both are assembly lines, but its like comparing a jet engine assembly to car engine assembly. Same basic idea, but the different quality controls change the complexity and cost. Semi-conductor production requires clean rooms, and a small mistake, like dropping a platter or having one go bad, makes a huge difference. Dropping a RAM chip or a sneeze on an HD, not so much. Another factor would be personel cost, with semi-conductor workers being higher trained and therefor higherpaid.

i don't contradict myself. i'm saying average, not so techy consumers won't do much research about the computer they buy (they do a bit, not much) if their family have a tradition of using mac, they'd natually go to their fav mac store and get a mac (i'll get to PC in a bit), they won't be obsessed with C2D

Processor type, at least GHz and name, is one of the top things people research. Most people don't know the difference between OSX and Windows. And bigger is always better.

Prosumer (i cant believe im using this term), if they know the line won't be updated for a yr, they won't wait for that either, however, they'd wait if there's a month... so if apple constantly release stuff once a yr or two, they effectively decrease the number of those "months" right before releases, therefore increase sales

But if Apple only updates once a year or two, it it will always be worth it to wait long periods of time to update. The updates and differences will be huge. That is even tougher on customers, even your prosumers. If they need a new computer now, but they get updated every 2 years and they are six months away, they have to choose between a 1.5 year old computer or none. One and a half years off a computers life spane is huge. If it takes 3 years for one to go out of date, you have just lost half the life span of your computer. That effectively doubles your computer costs.

now if you are someone who's on the edge between PC and Mac, you'd probably look at the price, spec and OS.. if the priceis more important, you won't choose mac either way, if the latter is more imporant, well, you'd choose mac
(and all the above options are independent whether apple release new processors constantly)

Spec is not. Spec is the definition of how often you update, a year old spec is a bad spec. Also Apple is becoming much more competitive on price, exhibit Mac Pro and Macbook.

i admit there are then a lot of ppl who would be weighing between OS and price and specs.. then the smarter ones would realize that the specs aren't THAT different, sure the price is different, so then it ultimately again, go between OS and price.. as in, do you think the OS worth that much?

And if someone has no preference about the OS difference, it isn't a factor. They revert to specs and price. This is a lot of people.

nobody buys mac JUST because the specs.

Again, you are stuck on the current Mac market of diehard fans, and to say "nobody" is wrong. Just look at Macrumors, lots of people not buying because of specs.

 

[EricChunky]

stop!!

apple wants to be a hardware company,

but it only does good software.

that's it..

 

[bearbo]

And yes, Merom has shown itself to perform better than Yonah. Early benchmarks were of pre-production chips. Current benchmarks show a measurable difference.
Heat, yes, again current benchmarks, as opposed to ones on preproduction, show negligible heat change.

and there is still opposite benchmarks, plus, it made it sounds like you KNOW that apple is experiencing no problems? merom has shown most slightly higher than 10% of improvement in very selective areas

Apple and Sony don't have the same market strategy, but they do operate under the same cost constraints. Especially when it comes to manufacturing. Very few companies actually make their own computers. Apple doesn't.

right, except Sony's doesn't expect their computer to make most of their money, whereas apple does.

The Macbook problems are all the more reason why Apple wouldn't skip an update. They get to replace a problematics product with a better one.

this is hardly a valid argument. the last time i checked, it wasn't the processor that's causing the problem

The major difference is the allowable error is much larger. Both are assembly lines, but its like comparing a jet engine assembly to car engine assembly. Same basic idea, but the different quality controls change the complexity and cost. Semi-conductor production requires clean rooms, and a small mistake, like dropping a platter or having one go bad, makes a huge difference. Dropping a RAM chip or a sneeze on an HD, not so much. Another factor would be personel cost, with semi-conductor workers being higher trained and therefor higherpaid.

i dont mean the testing of each unit, which is what semiconductor companies has to do, i meant the testing of the design...

and just so you know, semiconductor "workers" also known as technicians, are not as highly trained and highly paid as you think. no offense to any technicians out there. the work according to sets of instruction, put wafers in the right place at the right time, carefully. it's the semiconductor engineers that are highly trained.
however, i dont think mac assembly line worker can just drop macbook pros left and right.

Processor type, at least GHz and name, is one of the top things people research. Most people don't know the difference between OSX and Windows. And bigger is always better.

Most people care very much about OS X.. changing between OS X on your main computer takes some big decisions, not THAT many people use three OS X simultaneously.
Bigger OS?

how many people do you know, that liked OS X, but went ahead and bought a merom based PC just because it has merom and apple doesnt? i dont know any... most people i knwo that wanted a merom mac laptop, are waiting.

But if Apple only updates once a year or two, it it will always be worth it to wait long periods of time to update. The updates and differences will be huge. That is even tougher on customers, even your prosumers. If they need a new computer now, but they get updated every 2 years and they are six months away, they have to choose between a 1.5 year old computer or none. One and a half years off a computers life spane is huge. If it takes 3 years for one to go out of date, you have just lost half the life span of your computer. That effectively doubles your computer costs.

i didn't mean literally 2 yrs... how fast does intel update their chips? like every few months? so 2 update would be, well, a few more months... perhaps a bit over an yr?

heck, how long have ppl waited for merom already?

Spec is not. Spec is the definition of how often you update, a year old spec is a bad spec. Also Apple is becoming much more competitive on price, exhibit Mac Pro and Macbook.

are you telling me specs is not something pple consider?
i don't consider the price of mac pro and especially mabook is that competitive.

And if someone has no preference about the OS difference, it isn't a factor. They revert to specs and price. This is a lot of people.

list ONE person that has no preference about the OS difference in this forum?
specs and price are always always in favor of other PC manufactures.. they throw out the newest chip at the lowest price... well, again, is not the business model apple is pursuing

Again, you are stuck on the current Mac market of diehard fans, and to say "nobody" is wrong. Just look at Macrumors, lots of people not buying because of specs.

let me say it again "No body buys apple JUST because of the specs."
i did NOT however, say people would buy apple despite of the specs (For goodness's sake, i even cap'ed the JUST... learn your logic)
Apple's specs and price has never been the most competitive aspect of apple, but it's the design and comfort of using it that attract people.

if you want to buy the cheapest computer, you probably wouldn't be in here
if you want to have the ultimate machine, apple's probably not good for you

people who are switching, or are on the urge of, are probably gonna wait for the new chip if they research.. but if they've decided to switch, they probably have a bit more patient to actually carry it through, not just gonna say "Oh never mind, they don't have the absolutely latest of chip, despite how it might not be performing that much better and everything"

are you looking to switch, but pissed because apple's not putting in that chip?

look around, poeple aren't waiting for merom exactly, they are waiting for the stuff in the next update.. that have, among merom, perhaps better graphic card, easily accessible HDD, and (altho i dont think its likely) redesign...

again, if you can't have what it takes, perhaps a alienware would better suit you

 

[Demon Hunter]

*proceeds to shoot self in head*

 

[FFTT]

I don't think this is a matter of Apple not wanting to stay on top during the
Core Wars, but as I said before, Apple is much more conservative about the balance of performance and heat.

Too much heat and you start having premature logic board failures and complimentary asbestos trousers.

I REALLY DO NOT KNOW why Apple has delayed the Merom upgrades in their notebooks, but it stands to reason, that they are being cautious.

They might release a Merom speed bump any day now or choose to wait
for a better configuration.

We should not assume that Apple will use every single Processor that Intel makes available.

 

[technicolor]

I would estimate that 90% of people buying computers have no idea what is on the horizon. And I think that is a fair estimate.

Which means, nobody looks bad if they don't update. I can easily ask 10 random people if they know what Merom is, or even a Core 2 Duo and 9 wouldnt know, I think the chance that all 10 wouldnt is pretty high.

People here need to remember we are not represetative of the mass population, who happens to be the people buying most of the computers sold.

Today all people look at is that # in front of Ghz. And maybe a MB or GB every now and then.


And as someone may have said, some of you are getting way too wrapped up in the next processor. I mean, Merom isn't that super of an upgrade when you look at Pentium M to Core Duo. 64-bit most of you arent using.

Then you pretend as if the current notebooks will lbe equivelent to an 8086.
I understand some are waiting for MBP chassis update, that is all fine and good. But waiting around months on end for the next processor or chipset is ridiculous as much so as coming here to whine about it as if everyone is feeling this strain. No, they are buying computers oblivious to these things.

GET OVER IT!

Excellent post.

Originally Posted by Demon Hunter
You're right that Apple can dawdle a little now and again. But what about professional users? And corporate customers?

.
These people(pros, corporations, and schools) upgrade the least.

 

[ChrisA]

of course the merom would finish rendering a povray scene faster than the yonah one.

Maybe but how would you know? Would you need a stop watch? If you need a stop watch to know the difference why do you care?

Like I said: Without a measurement device, benchmark or looking inside how would you know if the MBP contained a Memron chip. People are whinning about something that they could not even notice

In my experiance a computer needs to by about 2x faster before a normal user at the keyboard will notice and say "wow this is faster". 10% and 20% differences are not perceivable. Experianced users can detect 50% speed bumps. The Memron chip will give you 20% more CPU speed at best but that will only be noticable on CPU limited tasks (like rendering)

How many of these "whiners" actually create digital content of any kind?

 

[emotion]

Like I said: Without a measurement device, benchmark or looking inside how would you know if the MBP contained a Memron chip.

How many of these "whiners" actually create digital content of any kind?

This might sound whiney but you do know it's called merom don't you?

 

[milozauckerman]

Like I said: Without a measurement device, benchmark or looking inside how would you know if the MBP contained a Memron chip.

Perhaps by the greater depreciation when I went to sell it in 36 months?

 

[zap2]

As opposed to their historical reputation as being speed demons compared to PCs?

Corps that buy Macs buy them for OS X, not for speed. Speed is nice, but Apple isn't going to win on that.

Still I can see no reason why Apple should NOT upgrade...Apple went with Intel for speed..so why not bring all the speed you can to the Mac line up?


That said Merom is VERY hyped up on this forum...its not going to be a HUGE upgrade. The biggest upgrade that Macs will likely ever get was the PPC --> x86 upgrade we just saw

 

[tuartboy]

You're right that Apple can dawdle a little now and again. But what about professional users? And corporate customers?

Apple will become the tortoise of the computing world. Not exactly the best reputation to have when your IT manager needs 500 units.

Neither professional users or (especially) corporate customers are going to jump on a new technology because it could be 7% faster on some applications. Hell, it's common for IT departments to run OSes a version behind. Zerox just rolled out XP SP2. I know many security professionals who still use Windows 2000.

The latest and greatest is no substitute for tried and tested.

Lastly, no one is going to jump ship for such a minor reason either. Professionals and companies have a lot invested in these systems and workflows and will not spend the money and time to switch on a whim.

 

[jhu]

Maybe but how would you know? Would you need a stop watch? If you need a stop watch to know the difference why do you care?

Like I said: Without a measurement device, benchmark or looking inside how would you know if the MBP contained a Memron chip. People are whinning about something that they could not even notice

In my experiance a computer needs to by about 2x faster before a normal user at the keyboard will notice and say "wow this is faster". 10% and 20% differences are not perceivable. Experianced users can detect 50% speed bumps. The Memron chip will give you 20% more CPU speed at best but that will only be noticable on CPU limited tasks (like rendering)

in my experience, there's no perceptible difference between a 1ghz processor and a 3ghz processor for word processing or web browsing. so why even upgrade in the first place?

How many of these "whiners" actually create digital content of any kind?

part of the issue is that merom costs the same as yonah with the same thermal output. every other major manufacturer already has core 2 duo laptops. it is not unreasonable for the potential customer to expect a core 2 duo laptop from apple since:

1) apple switched to intel due to supply and performance issues and
2) apple now does not have supply or performance issues

thus, because they are not delivering, there is no one to blame but apple. at least in the past, the processor manufacturer could be the scapegoat. this is no longer true.

 

[Sun Baked]

Skipping a release to finish the design of a major form factor change wouldn't hurt.

Was smart of Apple to Mac the MacBooks look similar to the machines they replace, but a redesign would be welcome with the Crestline/Merom upgrades.

Think about this. Merom is the end of the line for the current socket.

It would make much more sense for a total design refresh to come with Santa Rosa, next spring/summer...not for a Merom update.

New chipset, possible new motherboard...makes much more sense at that time.

Just my thought.

In case you missed it Crestline is the next chipset, think about that.

Which is why I said a redesign would be welcome at that time...

 

[MacManTexas56]

basically here is what people are talking or WHINING about.......if you must call it whining...i'm part of the whiners. you see all the computer companies put merom in their laptops and you're wondering hmmm when is apple going to do that. I really want to spend my money to have a very nice MBP but i still don't get why apple doesn't have the latest processor. You then say....screw it and go up to the apple store and buy a MBP. You use it for a few days....then the next tuesday comes around and BOOM. apple updates its site and has merom in it's laptops for what.....now $1799 for the base model instead of $1999. Why not just save your money and wait to see when they finally put merom in the MBP. Yeah it is ridiculous when companies like TwinHead whatever it is...some no name company has merom in a laptop and apple doesn't. Apple is known to cheat people all the way up to the last minute and not drop the price on the current machines. I mean look at the people that paid $1699 prior to the core 2 duo release in the imac and now the 20inch is only $1499. do you think that person was happy that they overpaid by $200 and have older technology and less ram?

I've seen this kinda stuff happen when intel was first released. There was an apple salesman talking to this couple that had no idea about computers and he sold them a G5 imac for full damn price....eventhough they had the new intel machines out. He didn't bother to say oh sir how about this new model it's our latest and greatest and it's actually a bit cheaper......no apple is there to make every damn dime off of everyone.

so basically people see that merom is ahead so why buy the old model for full retail price when here in maybe 2 weeks they can get a little bit faster machine with better options for a few hundred less.

it's like the one guy said....why pay for a 2006 model vehicle at a 2007 price when the 2007 vehicle has the newest technology and better options.

who cares if people whine....they have good reason, especially with the current problems that are ongoing with the current rev A models. Also, Apple is notorious for not dropping prices when an update is coming.

 

[macman2790]

well i think they should just pull off a miracle at mwsf with core 2duo macbook pros with NAND flash memory and 802.11n since their so far behind now.