MacBook Pros in tight supply, new models could broaden gap with MacBooks - Page 2

Originally Posted by emig647

Probably not a matte option for the 13". It seems this is an option apple only wants to offer the pro users (started with 17 and finally migrated to 15).

I'm starting to think we'll never see blu-ray drives in mac computers...

WTF with this update, for real. I feel like more people are waiting on this update than usual, maybe it's just because I'm waiting it feels so nuts. But it seems there are dozens of people here and hundreds at Macrumors.com (which I never even heard about until this dang MBP update limbo). Also I feel like there are way more rumors this time around. Just look at macrumors.com or even AI. It's torture. A new rumor that seems to be very convincing that MBPs are coming out in a week or "any day now" comes out like every week since January!! This Apple secrecy crap is just lame for minor product updates.

Originally Posted by mitchelljd

Yes, You are missing .. BLU-RAY
The Superdrive is just not very super anymore. As someone who works with music and photography, I really need to option to backup files to BD disc. Also, i have a large BD movie collection and i can't spare any hard drive space on my laptop for digital copies to fill it up. and i also have netflix. so i like to rent BD discs. digital copy or not. i need BD

Originally Posted by roblevi

Get rid of the optical drive altogether. Useless space waster. Use the space to make the laptop thinner, or install another SSD and extra memory. If you need to use an optical drive, buy and external. Taking up all that space and weight for a drive most of us hardly use is a waste.

Originally Posted by solarein

And just why is the 13" MBP not "pro"? I really don't understand why Apple limits the pricing and options available on smaller models. The size of the models should not be related to price and the options available to the price. It's just a preference, and many people would like to spend more on a smaller model to get a capable yet portable machine.

Originally Posted by Kali

I agree with the last comments : PLEASE APPLE REMOVE THE OPTICAL DRIVE ! It's useless, on a portable computer ! Make the PRO portable thinner and lighter !

Originally Posted by Aquatic

Not unless it's so we can have a second drive and/or battery bay. a second bay for SSD would be cool esp. if OS X allowed us to use it as a super-huge cache, and/or to store frequently accessed system files (e.g. pieces of OS X) on it, and our user files on the HDD.

Dude optical ain't going away for another decade.

Originally Posted by Aquatic

Cool pic. Oh I agree with everything you're saying solip and believe me I'm on your team. I think the main reason they'll remain is because a lot of stuff from the past two decades is still kicking around on CD and DVD. That's all I'm getting at. It's like VHS tapes which are just now fading away. DVD came out in the early 90s but took a while to replace VHS. Perhaps optical will fade out..I hope so.

Jeez we just need those new MBPs now!

Originally Posted by solarein

And just why is the 13" MBP not "pro"? I really don't understand why Apple limits the pricing and options available on smaller models. The size of the models should not be related to price and the options available to the price. It's just a preference, and many people would like to spend more on a smaller model to get a capable yet portable machine.

Originally Posted by Aquatic

So the shareholder meeting went great, AAPL has 40 billion in cash and only 25% of their revenue is from selling Macs. All Macs put together! Jeez I guess they don't need to worry about the MBP. I wonder if maybe they really won't update until April or something. I didn't realize Macs were such a tiny part of their revenue, I knew it was not the majority but not that small. Damnit I just need a new laptop this is nuts. \

Originally Posted by svnipp

Even if they could fit the fastest processor, second graphics chip, etc., would there be enough market demand to build such a 13" monster? My guess is that most people who can afford and demand those extras are also wanting the larger display of the 15" or 17" models.

Originally Posted by solarein

This is exactly what I mean, actually. Apple is deliberately not including, say, more powerful processors in the 13" model compared to the 15" model not because of space or thermal constraints (since the processors have the same TDP and are pin-compatible), but presumably because they either don't think people who want smaller machines want as much power, or because they want people who want more power to spend more money on the bigger machines. But there are plenty of people who would rather spend more money to get the same performance in a smaller machine because they value portability. The demand is there.

Originally Posted by Aquatic

So the shareholder meeting went great, AAPL has 40 billion in cash and only 25% of their revenue is from selling Macs. All Macs put together! Jeez I guess they don't need to worry about the MBP. I wonder if maybe they really won't update until April or something. I didn't realize Macs were such a tiny part of their revenue, I knew it was not the majority but not that small. Damnit I just need a new laptop this is nuts. \

Originally Posted by solarein

This is exactly what I mean, actually. Apple is deliberately not including, say, more powerful processors in the 13" model compared to the 15" model not because of space or thermal constraints (since the processors have the same TDP and are pin-compatible), but presumably because they either don't think people who want smaller machines want as much power, or because they want people who want more power to spend more money on the bigger machines. But there are plenty of people who would rather spend more money to get the same performance in a smaller machine because they value portability. The demand is there.

Originally Posted by melgross

I dont think there are a lot of people who would spend that. The 13" is a way to get into the pro line at a lesser price.

Originally Posted by solarein

So the lower end 13" can have slower processors and no discrete GPU, while the higher end 13" can have faster processors and discrete GPU.

Originally Posted by psylence2k

Anyone have any idea when apple might decide to refresh the macbook air ?

Originally Posted by solarein

So the lower end 13" can have slower processors and no discrete GPU, while the higher end 13" can have faster processors and discrete GPU. Basically, have the 13" cover the same range in terms of price and performance as the 15", but shifted downward a bit due to the limitations of the formfactor. Right now the 13"'s price/performance range is not just shifted downward, but the top of the range is chopped off because Apple doesn't think people looking for portable machines want that much performance. This I would like to see changed with the refresh.

Originally Posted by psylence2k

Anyone have any idea when apple might decide to refresh the macbook air ?

Originally Posted by Isomorphic

Various posters are arguing the merits of optical drives, or removing optical drives... I think Apple has tested the waters with the MacBook Air just to decide that particular point.

You may see a MacBook Air Pro with the refresh--or, the MacBook Air may go away entirely, since the mainline MacBooks may accomplish the same thing.

(I say lose the optical drive; put in another SSD or battery or make the case smaller. An external drive need not be all that large. When I last traveled with my '06 MacBook Pro, I copied ripped DVDs to it rather than fool with bringing the physical DVDs. If I really needed an optical drive I would not mind lugging a small external. Besides, the last time I used the optical drive on the laptop was to install Snow Leopard. In fact, I think the only time I've used the optical drive was when there was an OS disk involved.)

Originally Posted by solipsism

Now we're back to space as engineering issues in the 13" over the 15".

Originally Posted by infinitespecter

So then why can Sony fit Core i7 processors with discrete and integrated graphics, a BD burner, Verizon wireless access, an SD slot, expresscard slot, and twin SSDs into a 3lb package smaller than a Macbook with a 13.1" full HD screen for the price of a midrange 15" Macbook? I find it very hard to believe that if Sony can do it that Apple can't.

Originally Posted by solipsism

Which model is this? Sony has great engineers, too, but you can't bend the laws of physics.

BTW, the Core-i7 means nothing as the TDP for mobiles runs from 18W for the CULV version up to the 45W for the quad-core version. The next MBA will get a Core-i7 even though the C2D in the MB is faster.

Originally Posted by solipsism

Which model is this? Sony has great engineers, too, but you can't bend the laws of physics.

BTW, the Core-i7 means nothing as the TDP for mobiles runs from 18W for the CULV version up to the 45W for the quad-core version. The next MBA will get a Core-i7 even though the C2D in the MB is faster.

Originally Posted by solarein

It's the model singly responsible for giving me hope for great things to come with a new 13" MBP.

Originally Posted by infinitespecter

So then why can Sony fit Core i7 processors with discrete and integrated graphics, a BD burner, Verizon wireless access, an SD slot, expresscard slot, and twin SSDs into a 3lb package smaller than a Macbook with a 13.1" full HD screen for the price of a midrange 15" Macbook? I find it very hard to believe that if Sony can do it that Apple can't.

Originally Posted by infinitespecter

So then why can Sony fit Core i7 processors with discrete and integrated graphics, a BD burner, Verizon wireless access, an SD slot, expresscard slot, and twin SSDs into a 3lb package smaller than a Macbook with a 13.1" full HD screen for the price of a midrange 15" Macbook? I find it very hard to believe that if Sony can do it that Apple can't.

Originally Posted by solarein

The new Sony Vaio Z series: http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/...tegoryId=16154

When I first saw those specs I also thought it was not physically possible. But alas! they had done it. It's the model singly responsible for giving me hope for great things to come with a new 13" MBP.

The Core i7 in the Vaio Z is the 35W one, the same one as the MBPs would probably use.

Originally Posted by Isomorphic

Various posters are arguing the merits of optical drives, or removing optical drives... I think Apple has tested the waters with the MacBook Air just to decide that particular point.

You may see a MacBook Air Pro with the refresh--or, the MacBook Air may go away entirely, since the mainline MacBooks may accomplish the same thing.

(I say lose the optical drive; put in another SSD or battery or make the case smaller. An external drive need not be all that large. When I last traveled with my '06 MacBook Pro, I copied ripped DVDs to it rather than fool with bringing the physical DVDs. If I really needed an optical drive I would not mind lugging a small external. Besides, the last time I used the optical drive on the laptop was to install Snow Leopard. In fact, I think the only time I've used the optical drive was when there was an OS disk involved.)

Originally Posted by Aquatic

You know, I'm starting to agree...I was arguing for ODD since many files from another era are still bound to discs. But like ya'll I haven't used my optical since...installing OS X! And 10.5 at that! I really had to think. Wait, I watched one DVD a few months ago. How about this...best case scenario...in the 13" and 15" we get a bay where we pick whether we want an ODD, HDD, SSD, or other device. I don't know whether it would get too complicated but allowing an extra battery would be SO COOL. And 3rd party companies could come up with other add-ons, like adding a card to do USB 3 or some other fancy interface or device. And perhaps the 17" could have two bays, or an ODD and an expansion bay. I mean that's a big machine, it's like a lunch tray.

And to differentiate..the regular MacBook wouldn't have either. No ODD but no bay. I'd hope they could thus chop $100 off. This would help institutional and education buyers, students, folks at home that don't want an ODD, etc. I guess the MacBook would become the MacBook Air. Perhaps not quite as thin or something. Thus the MacBook Air to justify higher cost would have to be faster or have more RAM/HD etc. or maybe just go away.

Well anyway here's to next Tuesday. Hey solip aren't you supposed to be on vacation? Take vacation, come back, enjoy new Apple updates.

Originally Posted by solipsism

You still can't deny the laws of physics. Having a 13" display in each doesn't mean they are the same size machines, only that they are the same size displays. You can get much more powerful systems the thicker you make the chassis.

What's the 13" MBP line? 0.95" the entire way but the Sony Viao Z gets goes up to 1.30" and has feet for more airflow? That isn't to say that the Viao is too thick or that the feet are silly but there are reasons for what we are seeing.

They are also only using SSDs for the dual drives. Since the typical HDD is 9.5mm and the typical SSD is 7mm, but the chassis is considerably thicker toward the back, they can easily stack two of them on each other, so they are still taking up the same footprint space as 1 HDD or SSD.

The uses of the Core-i7 can't be considered because the Macs have yet to be updated to the Core-ix line. I have doubts there will be any Core-i7s in the 13" line. keep it i3 with i5 are the higher-end with i5 and i7 in he 15" and 17" models.

Then there is price. Going smaller does cost more. The Viao Z does start at $600 more than the 13" MBP.

PS: I only perused the specs for a second last night because going to bed so that i based on fatigued research with sleep immediately afterwards so some of my specifics could be very off. That doesn't change the fact that cost and physics play major roles and should not be overlooked. The Viao Z looks like a great machine but for the cost I would expect quite a bit more than a 13" MBP, I'd also not be surprised to see a discrete GPU in the 13" MB or MBP, like they had in the 12" PB now that they can't use the 9400M as the IGP.

Originally Posted by solarein

...this form-over-function thing really needs to stop, especially on the Pro line that is supposed to be more about performance.

Originally Posted by solarein

The chassis of the new Vaio Z is actually about 1" thick throughout, it's measured as 1.3" at the back because the battery has protruding feet that raise the machine up a bit, for the airflow reason as you said. It's still a bit thicker than the MBP, but not much. If I had to choose between not needing 0.3" of raised airflow space and powerful performance, I would choose the latter. But unfortunately I'm not optimistic that Apple would feel the same way. But at some point this form-over-function thing really needs to stop, especially on the Pro line that is supposed to be more about performance.

Originally Posted by Aquatic

Definitely. Sacrificing 20% performance just so the laptop doesn't have to stand up mere fractions of a inch off a table is the classic "new" Steve Jobs Apple. I agree it sucks. Same thing for it having to be paper-thin. To a point, it's good to have a solid case, minimalist design, good UI, keep things compact, etc. But yeah I agree they take things a bit far in several areas on the laptops. There is definitely room between the current design ethic and becoming a fugly 3" think luggable Dell. I particularly think the 15" and 17" don't need to be quite so thin. What good does thin do you when it's so large planimetrically?

Originally Posted by solipsism

Those are valid points but I wouldn't say it's necessarily form over function and simply being "Faster" doesn't mean that the Vaio Z is more function over form as that isn't the only measure we need to consider.

The Pro line is more about performance over the non-Pro line of Macs, but not only about processing performance and not usually trying to be the fastest PC in that display size for that machine type.

I answer the rest under Aquatic's post...



There are some things to consider with Sony's design. How rigid/durable is it compared to the 13" MBP? How big is the battery and how much of the battery sticks out to make that 1.3" height?

solarein states that the average thickness of the Vaio Z is 1" but the MBP is 0.95" inches. How much of that 5% over the footprint of the machine helps with cooling and making components that can be built higher?

What purpose are the feet on the Vaio Z? Presumably for cooling, but most laptops are often used on the lap where the feet become pointless and the bottom is firmly resting on an object nearing 100° F. Is the machine tested well to operate under those conditions? If so, then why have the feet at all.

If there is an issue with Apple's machine it's likely not form over function so much as marketing over "spec listing". In other words, Apple choose not to make a 13" notebook that starts at $1,800 to compete with Sony but instead to offer a quality machine that starts at $1500, which they latter dropped to $1200. Apple's goal is to make money, as is any other PC company but it seems the only way for others is to go below or above the performance Apple is willing to offer for a machine class.

Originally Posted by infinitespecter

Having used the last generation Z extensively (the new one isn't that different case wise), the case isn't as rigid. It's mostly made of carbon fiber impregnated plastic, but I've never seen a plastic case as rigid as the aluminum unibody cases. To be fair though, it is lighter than a Macbook Air, so something had to be compromised.

That said, I think you're getting away from the point of this. The point is that a thin and light 13" notebook with loads of expansion and power can be built despite your earlier assertions that there was simply no room. Obviously I'm not suggesting that Apple make an identical computer to Sony. It doesn't have to have a 1680x1050 screen or weigh 3lbs.

However, there's no technical reason why they can't make a more powerful, more expandable 13" Macbook Pro. It doesn't have to start at $1900. It could start at $1100 and allow people to configure it as they please (like virtually every other computer maker in the world does). The inverse is that there's no reason that anyone should have to spend $2500 to get a 17" MBP either.

If their designs don't allow for it, the designs need to change. As Aquatic said, making the designs more flexible doesn't mean that they will instantly turn into 9lb Thinkpads.