What I am disappointed with is the lack of discrete graphics and low resolution screen. Two things that Apple should address asap in the 13in. The only reason I am considering the 15 is because of antiglare, 330m(wish 512mb was standard and 1Gb for i7 and top end). This is just my opinion I know apple is a little behind in hardware but their build quality covers for there lack.
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.
Wow...the 13" models actually got a great upgrade!
- Thread starter Wolfpup
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That's because all the "engineers" who are not working at Apple are just soooo much better than all the real engineers who _are_ working at Apple.
I'm sure _you_ could fit an i5 with discrete graphics into the 13" case with 10 hour battery life and sell it for $1199 at a profit that keeps shareholders happy. You can, but only as long as you post on MacRumors and don't have to do the real work.
Of course every real computer will have compromises in its design (you don't want to end up with something like the car designed by Homer Simpson). The specific compromises that Apple made in the MBP 13" are actually not the ones that I would have hoped for for my personal computer use, but they are exactly the ones that I would have used to sell the maximum number of computers. The 15" MBP is there for people who prefer different compromises.
The 13" MBP has more CPU performance than 90% of computer users will ever need (and there is the 15", the iMac i5 and the MacPro for the other 10%), it has enough graphics performance for 90% of computer users, it is light enough for 90% of computer users and Apple builds the MacBook Air for the others, and the 10 hour battery life is the best around. And an MBP 13" with comparable specs sold for $300 more just two weeks ago. No complaints at all.
Read that post again. I'm sure English is his first language. Nobody learning English as a second or third language would start every sentence with a lowercase letter. "kidding" is not a word that is in your average English book for beginners. It is the typical careless and lazy approach to writing that you only get from people using their first language. And it is _very_ annoying to anybody who is learning the language, who finds it a lot, lot harder to understand a post when it isn't written in correct English, and who isn't sure about what is correct and may even copy errors if they read them often enough.
Apple could have released a Core i5 13" with the 330M GPU. It would have been priced at or above the $1799 15" though. There are probably a lot of people on this board who would have paid for the high powered highly portable machine, but I don't think it would have enough mass market sales to make it worth it for Apple at this point.
I don't know who says that, but the specs on the website specify the 540m and 620m which are dual core. Battery capacity is given in mAh which makes it impossible to compare because they don't tell you how many volts, so I guess they have something to hide there.
yeah they stated up to quad core. that would probably be the i7, the i5 only has a quad core for the desktop version. So I suppose it would have the be a i5 dual core with HT or an i7 quadcore with HT. my bad!
don't know about the battery, they claim 9 hours. Like apple claims 9 hours on their i5 and lots of people here say those too just get around 5 hours in daily life ... so i guess that would be fair to assume on the asus as well. i really havent made up my mind yet about it though. i would want to see it first i guess. Seems i will have regrets no matter what i do:
1) get the MBP13 2010 and regret buying obsolete hardware
2) wait for fall 2010 and regret working on the eee for 7 more months
3) get the asus and regret not buying a MBP
4) get the MBP15 i5 2.4 and regret having to sleep on the sofa for a month because my wife'd get really mad
ah well, it is just a computer. maybe i should get back to real life now ...
an investment huh? well SHE'd never agree to that, she is still using a nokia 3210 as phone and just started using msn a few months ago ... so in her eyes they're just useless expensive gadgets
Beautiful.
With the previous quarter results, it shows that Apple isn't losing market interest by staying with the C2Ds. Their approach to mass appeal works.
Of course we are going to see some spec whores who want the latest and greatest, but they can be catered by other companies that are willing to offer reduced crucial laptop features (battery, weight, dimensions).
You're insane. FFS if you've already waited 8 months!? 16 months is like 1/3 the life of a computer or maybe even 1/2!
mmm thanks for calling me insane
I know it is a long wait. I even went as far as buying a plastic MB in november ... but the order got lost or something since i never got it even in februari. so then they'd reorder it for me but I decided to wait for the spring MBP refresh since the highend upgraded MB i ordered was likely to be default in the new MBP line (4gb, 320hdd, better processor). I just didnt want to spend 1149 on a C2D so that is why i am considering waiting or upgrading to a 15" i5, i just think that the 13" is a sweet spot in size. bigger then my eee but small enough to use in bed, on the couch, on vacation.
uh... I've waited 6 years to upgrade my laptop lol
I finally ordered the 13" because the long battery life is what I really need. I have my Mac Pro for performance.
If you have a MacBook or MacBook Pro already though, this upgrade is lame to say the best.
wow! what are you on .... and can i have some please?
a great upgrade? and here i postponed my mbp13 purchase by yet another 8 months or so, just because i thought it was a lame upgrade (to put it nicely). the 330 is mediocre at best (and still not dedicated but using slow shared DDR3) besides the c2d had a beard two years ago.
but i am glad you like it and should you buy it i am sure you will be very happy with your purchase.
stefan
You will wait for years I would predict. Most certainly there wont be any dedicated graphics in there by years. You do not have an Apple yet? So then stuck with your PC and miss this shiny little gem. More for those who know that its worth its money.
Whoever wrote the copy for the main page got it wrong. Check under the specs and the best it lists is the Core i7 620m, which is a dual core. Only difference between it and the best Core i5 is it bumps the clock speed from 2.53 to 2.66GHz, and the Level 3 cache from 3 to 4MB.
There might be some exception, but so far the smallest notebook I've seen with a quad is a 15", like Asus and Dell sell some. (Right now there are 4 mobile CPUs they call 'Core i7'. Three are quads, clocked 1.6 to 2GHz, the fourth is the best of the new line with integrated graphics and the memory controller moved back off the CPU.)
Looks like all the u30jc models I can actually find are using that Core i3. It looks like at worst it would be about the same as a 2.4GHz Core 2, and at best could be maybe roughly 15% faster than the 2.66GHz Core 2, so it's not THAT much better.
I haven't seen very comprehensive benchmarking. From the unfortunately very limited set of benchmarks Anandtech did (I may well be missing a better set), it looks like it ranges from 7% to 46% faster than an equivalently clocked (presumably Penryn) Core 2. (EDIT: Just saw some results from Tom's, and they're pretty much in line with that, with one encoding task being 53% faster.) The faster results are all from things like encoding. For a lot of things, the Core 2 they used will be just as fast as had they gone with a (slower) Core i3/i5, and for things where there's a bigger difference, well, it's still not as big of a difference as if they'd gone with a Core i3/i5 and just used Intel's graphics.
I haven't seen any benchmarks at all on it yet, though presumably all it's weaknesses stem from limited memory bandwidth. It probably does worse the higher resolution it's running.
yeah same here. i read on a Dutch site that the i5 version will come mid May 2010, which is probably an optimistic statement ... so i am guessing early june they would have to be available. Holland will not even get the i7 at first the same article stated.
It's sad that you have to resort to personally attacking me just because you don't agree with me.
I'm sure _you_ know everything there is to know about computer engineering and I know that _you_ know what all consumers want, not to mention that _you_ likely know Steve Jobs personally since you have such a great wealth of information on exactly how Apple's internal processes work.
_Your_ input is as valid as anyone else's, but _you_ can't pretend to know everything. It's time to grow up a bit...just because you're on the internet doesn't mean you can act like a 12 year old. Disagreeing is one thing, but quoting everything I say and trying to create some witty retort in an attempt to make my response look outlandish is just pitiful. If you've got a personal problem with what I post, tell me via PM.
i use both an apple imac and a win7 desktop at work, so i know both. i'd prefer the MBP really. Stuck with it for years to come you think? i wouldn't expect that myself, i really can't see intel deliver C2D's for yet another few generations. perhaps the white MB2010 upgrade this fall.
But the late2010/early2011 update for the MBP will surely get either an AMD if apple makes the switch or an i3/i5 with a 330, right? aren't the C2D's EOLled by then too?
i hope this MBP13 is *really* succesful so intel can get rid of its last stock of obsolete previous gen cpu's and replace their stock with current gen stuff.
Yeah, but the point is whatever they use, it'll be equally out of date. You could wait 3 years and you'll probably still be getting hardware at best on par for the time it's released as the 13" Macbook Pro is right now. Right now is the best the hardware's ever been relative to when it's launched, I'd say.
It's really not a big deal-I mean they'd be using slower clocked Core i3/i5s, which would have at best just a tiny bit better performance than they've got now, and for at least some things they'd be slower.
yes, a few mhz increase on an old c2d cpu is a great update, much greater than a i5 cpu...
The GPU was bumped up much further than switching to a Core i5 would have been. Particularly a Core i5 clocked slower than a Core 2.
Some of you guys seem overly hung up on the CPU. Arrandale's better than Penryn, but it's not THAT much better.
Seeing the tests of the i7 MacBook Pros coming in, I'm glad the 13" didn't get an i5; it probably would have melted.
i can't believe people are hailing the 320M as if it were the best thing since sliced bread. Yeah it might be better then an integrated i3 or the nvidia in the 2009MBP but it is still just a mediocre videocard with shared DDR3 RAM making effective RAM "just" 3,75gb instead of 512mb or 1gb dedicated (fast) video ram (like a 1gb nvidia 335M).
i agree though that an i3 wouldnt be much of an upgrade for the MBP13. I would rather have seen an i5-520m in this baby. with an after market upgrade to an intel x25 ssd it would have been my perfect laptop.
i have been eyeing the MBP15 now as i mentioned before, but going down that path also makes me want to upgrade to the HR antiglare screen ofcourse
or just get an alienware mx15 (yes it's ugly!) with an i7 720QM and a 1gb GTX260m
i agree though that an i3 wouldnt be much of an upgrade for the MBP13. I would rather have seen an i5-520m in this baby. with an after market upgrade to an intel x25 ssd it would have been my perfect laptop.
i have been eyeing the MBP15 now as i mentioned before, but going down that path also makes me want to upgrade to the HR antiglare screen ofcourse
or just get an alienware mx15 (yes it's ugly!) with an i7 720QM and a 1gb GTX260m