Apple to disrupt notebook space with radically redesigned MacBook Pros - Page 8

There is no way Apple is doing that. They will have 2 separate & distinct lines. MacBook Air for the thin & light crowd, and MacBook Pro for the industrious computer user that needs a beefier, speedier processor with discreet graphics.

So you don't believe the MacBook Pro is getting redesigned, then.

Note that Apple doesn't really care about the "industrious computer user" as many people attempt to paint him. He doesn't exist like he used to.

You can still make the MBP thinner and/or lighter even following design cues from the MBA like they've done in the past while maintaining the 35-45W TDP CPU and dGPU of the MBP line.

I never said that.

Probably, but Apple will still differentiate their notebooks with a MacBook Air line & a MacBook Pro line.

Yes, you did.

You said "MacBook Air for the thin and light crowd", implying that the Pro would remain as not thin and not light.

You also said "MacBook Pro needs a beefier ", the implication being the computer needs to be larger to support such stuff.

What I'm not saying is there'll be a move to all ULP processors. We should still see the same line of chips in the larger MacBooks.

Or folks that play games that still insist on having disk 1 in the drive?

That's probably my number 1 use for the ODD and it's annoying to fiddle with an external drive on an airplane.

Wow, I remember that.

The last game I played that required that was Titanic: Adventure Out of Time, and that was on my LC 575.

"But the LC 575 didn't have any graphics chips how did it run that game?"

Not well, I'll tell you. Not well at all.

Can't these games be run from the internal HDD/SSD? Even putting it in a DMG would give it a mount point, right, while using less power and being faster than an ODD?

You're inferring that I said that Apple will not redesign the MacBook Pro. I never said such a thing. In fact on the last page I said:


This is what I believe Apple intends on doing. It fits their pattern. I've been on here a long time. I have read a lot of the hyperbole & over-the-top wishful thinking that goes on here. I've learned to temper my enthusiasm from what people here wish Apple should do with what Apple actually does.

"Beyond the rumor sites, way beyond." How many were disappointed with that? Think about it...

Ah, young grasshopper, I have taught you well

Shame that more can't see it.

You didn't teach me anything :P

I started a thread well over a year ago on the Mac Pro is Dead, and you know what? It still hasn't been updated. The Mac Pro hasn't seen an update since July 27, 2010.

I can think like Apple. It helps with the perspective I get from the young whipper snappers that post here. For the most part, Apple pivots — they don't jump. If you take a look at the hardware design moves that Apple has made in the last 7 years, you can see how evolutionary it is. PowerPC to Intel switch all the way to present unibody construction, the designs are evolutionary not radically overhauled. Maybe that shouldn't be. But that's how it is.

And again with the MacBook Pro I expect the same unibody MacBook Pro construction, modified noticeably from its current offering to a tapered design Ã* la MacBook Air. I wish they'd permanently remove the obnoxiously reflective glass in front of the display, but you know they love it & I can imagine they'll continue with it that look. That makes the computer heavier believe it or not. If it was negligible Apple probably would have it on the Air line. But since weight is a concern there, there's no glass on the Air. Hence the "Air" moniker.

I think Apple will move toward 16:9 displays. They've done it for the Cinema Display, both iMacs, and the 11-inch Air. It will make Airplay mirroring in Mountain Lion look a little more seamless, but they continued with the 16:10 ratio in the 13" MacBook Air, so I don't know if that's at all a consideration in Apple's eye.

Bottom line, they're going to get a major redesign, but in the end they'll still be MacBook Pros.

By the way, who here is buying a 15" MacBook Air?

This is what I have been trying to explain, but Tallest Skil still does not get it. A thinner, lighter, redesigned 2012 Macbook Pro could replace the Macbook Air. Apple could call the new model, "Macbook", but technically it's the redesigned Macbook Pro that has replaced the Macbook Air.

I think what's lacking in this discussion is marketing.

Remember the 4 boxes that Steve introduced to us? One side had a pro desktop & pro notebook, and the other side had a consumer desktop & consumer notebook. That was Apple's product strategy. Has this product strategy changed?

It became clear last year that Apple was making real headway with the MacBook Air in its consumer segment. So what happened to the Macbook which was geared to consumers? It went away.

Now one could argue with the seeming demise of the Mac Pro that we could see just a desktop line (iMac / Mac mini) and notebook line (MacBook).

But does this make for good marketing? That's the question. I believe Apple needs to have the two tiers based purely on how the market operates & to compete across the board. Granted they are changing the market to an extent — just look at the iPad.

At the end of the day what's feasible doesn't really matter. I don't think that the product strategy on the MacBook Air & MacBook Pro will change. From a marketing perspective, stepping up to the pro means spending more money. And Apple's raking it in right now.

[QUOTE=Tallest Skil;2055295]I'm trying to parse the difference between your options, and I'm not finding one.

I'm saying that Apple will redesign the Pro to be more Air-like. In doing so, they will remove the need for the name "Air", and since calling ALL of the laptops they sell "Pro" seems silly (particularly when half wouldn't have dedicated graphics), I figure they'll either rename the entire line to just "MacBook" with four sizes or keep the Pro name for the 15" and 17" and call the two Air sizes just "MacBook".


The 2011 13 inch Macbook Pro has a 2.8ghz i7 processor with turbo boost 2.0 going up to 3.4ghz, and it can take up to 8GB of DDR3 RAM. The only two things that it lacks for now, is dedicated graphics, and a quad core processor. The 2011 13 inch Macbook Air has a far weaker, 1.7ghz ultra low voltage cpu, integrated graphics, and non upgradable memory.

A redesigned, 13 inch Macbook Pro, with no ODD, will be able to have dedicated graphics, expandable memory, and a quad core or standard dual core processor. I can see Apple calling the redesigned 13 inch Macbook Pro, a "Macbook Pro".

The 2011 13 inch Macbook Pro has a 2.8ghz i7 processor with turbo boost 2.0 going up to 3.4ghz, and it can take up to 8GB of DDR3 RAM. The only two things that it lacks for now, is dedicated graphics, and a quad core processor. The 2011 13 inch Macbook Air has a far weaker, 1.7ghz ultra low voltage cpu, integrated graphics, and non upgradable memory.

A redesigned, 13 inch Macbook Pro, with no ODD, will be able to have dedicated graphics, expandable memory, and a quad core or standard dual core processor. I can see Apple calling the redesigned 13 inch Macbook Pro, a "Macbook Pro".

Well...assuming I can rip it correctly I suppose. That kind of defeats the purpose of using the disk as a crude form of DRM so I'm guessing they do the usual bad sector/etc stuff. I'm not DLing a cracked version.

What's effing annoying is that the game in question is Mass Effect 2. Not some 1990s vintage retro game.

ME2 has DRM built into it AND demands that the disk be in the drive. Really? WTF BioWare?

I suppose I can just buy ME3 off Steam but if games go like Diablo 3 and demand an active internet connection all the time I'm gonna give the PC game industry the middle finger and rely 100% on iPad gaming.

As big a fan of D2 that I was, D3 is dead to me. The only damn time I have to game is generally when I ain't got internet either.

I saw it long ago. Apple tries to please a lot of people and determine what the rest will tolerate. My version might be simplified a bit much, but that is what they do.


Specs increase over time across all computers. The Air cpu is weaker, but the gap is a bit less than the base clock would lead you to believe. Benchmarks which sometimes exagerrate real behavior place it around a 20-25% difference. I call the ram and graphics a bigger issue. If you really want cpu power, quad is the way to go most of the time. There are many many programs that will use 2-4 cores than 4+ anyway. I'm not sure what created that magic number.

This. It's taken 11 years to come out if you count the expansion.

Now as for the MacBook Pro, I think we will see flash storage by default in the next revision although I think we are a bit far away from getting as thin and light as the Air with a comparable processor. We need another year or two. I could be wrong and hope I am.

I've been on an MBA 11 for 2 years 60gb drive with full tools including eclipse. Just upgraded to 180gb to use lion. Thats way more than you need unless you are heavy on video.

Never miss Ethernet although I bought the dongle. Use the VGA dongle sometimes but we're upgrading to AirPlay. Same for hdmi, gone. No need for DVD.

I can see MBP for those that need DVD but MBA is a better package. Or go desktop and iPad with cloud. Or MBA with iPhone. These devices are just so much better than pc hardware its not funny.

Aside from Apple nixing the optical drive, next on the chopping block would be Firewire 800.  I would much rather have gigabit Ethernet & Thunderbolt if compromising over space is an issue.

 

Apple should care, what are the developers who make iOS and OSX apps going to use to create content?  OSX is a great tool (a proper UNIX system) for developers, designers, artists, professionals, and while they are a much smaller market overall than regular consumers, they are the ones driving traditional computer sales.  Anyhow, I'm personally not worried.  I read an interview with Tim Cook the other day where he specifically said that iOS and OSX won't merge, and OSX will remain a proper OS.  

 

As for the MBP, of course it's getting redesigned.  It'll probably be more Air-like, but with the same or better specs as current models.  The only wildcard being, if Intel's integrated graphics have progressed as they claim, then it could replace discrete graphics cards, and then there could be a single Macbook line.  

 

Macs. I don't see where that was called into question.

 

 

That hasn't happened, thankfully.

You should reconsider your sources of information. It's a big improvement from something that was terrible, and I have yet to see good Intel drivers on OSX.

I'm rather shocked at how certainly you have stated how much storage somebody else requires. The fact that you had to upgrade the SSD highlights how foolish that statement is. My Mac went well past 60 GB of disk usage after the second day of ownership.
There is virtually zero video on my current boot disk. About the only thing I really disagree with is the Ethernet feature. Well that and the use of AirPlay which I see as the wrong solution for me. I really like a large screen on the desktop.
Well for you maybe! IPad has me thinking seriously about a desktop the next round simply to avoid the performance hit of a laptop. AIRs are certainly good machines but they do come up short in a number of ways.

Apple could drop the descrete GPU in he base 15" MBP with Ivy Bridge. Sadly I think that would be a marketing mistake but that is me. The GPUs in the MBPs are a huge factor in favorability over the AIRs.

The question is, is 1,5x terrible still terrible?

That sentiment has come up several times in the past. The HD4000 compared against other lower end solutions for the current year doesn't actually look that bad. I'd still suggest anyone using one to load up with ram to whatever magic number allocates extra ram to the gpu if they're doing any gaming or anything that employs heavy OpenGL drawing, to keep it from choking due to memory starvation. I think the HD4000 makes the gpu class in the discrete gpu mini essentially pointless.

Anyway the current design kind of works. If they wished to go to integrated graphics, it might be to budget for additional features or hit a different price point. If it was just discrete graphics gone and everything else remains the same, I expect they would see a marketing backlash there. If they wanted to go that route, they should really try to get the best possible optimization on Intel drivers. The past few generations haven't been so great under OSX.

I guess I'm not sure what they'll do here. I'd say it's more likely if they make similar improvements going into next year. As of right now the track record of Intel gpus under OSX has not been very good, but I don't have the testing facilities available to Apple.

The 13" Pro (if it still exists) might make do with the HD4000, but there's no way they would downgrade the 15" that much. Check the boxes for that chip and the one in the current Pro, it may be ok for low end but it's still miles behind where the discreet cards in the Macbook Pros already are. 


http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Graphics-Cards-Benchmark-List.844.0.html
 

 

Heck, I'm even hoping with the added thermal headroom from removing the disk drive they will add a discreet card in the 13" to differentiate it from the Air. 

 

They did that years ago.

Any thoughts on what GPU the 15" will rock?

 

Provided they keep the low-end 15" around, the Intel 4000.

 

And the dedicated GPU in the high-end 15" will be whatever the modern ATI GPU is that has the same TDP as the one currently in the 15" MacBook Pro.

How will the application of poor thermal paste on Ivy Bridge affect the new Macs?

 

I would say, "In no way, shape, or form, as that doesn't have anything to do with the chips or computers inherently." Isn't that a manufacturing problem? How can one say anything bad about the chips in that regard?

If you build a computer from scratch and don't put any thermal paste on, you'll fry it immediately. If you put the paste on, it won't fry. Maybe I don't understand the problem here.

Could it possibly cause heating issues or no?

 

http://vr-zone.com/articles/ivy-bridge-proven-to-suffer-from-poor-thermal-grease/15844.html

It is all about heat transfer. This is about paste Intel applies, not user supplied paste on top of the heat spreaders. Intel got real cheap with Ivy Bridge. However this is a manufacturing issue, it should be fairly easy to do a better job on mobile chips. Or Apple could simply demands chips with better thermal properties.

I think you need to research a bit what is going on. I'd leave a link but forgot where the issue was brought up. In a nut shell this isn't something users can normally address.

Note that this is not a "heating" issue but a heat transfer issue. The chip might run warmer than expected but the actual power into the chip is often less than in previous models. It would be very possible for Apple to knock Intel up side the head and tell them not to do that on chips they buy. Given that Apple could run their machines a few degrees cooler with a given fan assembly. After all this is just paste.

I think those of you who say that the MacBook Air and MacBook Pro lines will merge into a single line-up are right.

 

The Air is a brilliant design. I have no doubt that the current 13" Air has cannibalised sales of the 13" MacBook Pro. The only barrier to switching for a lot of potential Air customers wasn't the GPU but the hard disk size. A capacity of 256 GB simply isn't enough for many users, especially when a single iTunes movie sucks up 1.5 to 2 GB of valuable SSD space. 

 

If Apple continues to produce a 13" MacBook Air and a 13" MacBook Pro, what will be the difference? Externally, they would look identical, no? 

 

If the design for the current Air works at 11" and 13" why wouldn't Apple increase it to 15"?

 

So my bet is a single line-up all called MacBooks. 

 

Apple is about simplification. Tim Cook gets this. it's why he decided that the New iPad should be called just that and not the iPad 3. 

 

What's bugging me is why Apple hasn't released the new 15" MacBook yet, I thought the mobile Ivy Bridge processors were good to go. 

 

I think we'll be getting a range of processors in the new macBook range, from low power to high power. That being the case, maybe Apple has to wait until all chip flavours are fully baked. So June 5th, right. 

 

Just make a 1 TB SSD an option please. 

 

You've answered your own question. MacBook Air processors aren't ready yet. Apple wouldn't ruin half the surprise by releasing their new 15" and 17" MacBook (sic) and leave the 11" and 13" Air the same to be made into the 11" and 13" MacBook (sic) later.

I really just want longer battery life, the i7 is already fast enough for me. Currently I'm getting about 3.5 hours if I dim the brightness to 50 percent and about 2.45 with full on my Air 11, that sucks. If they can't do it then I would like a removable battery so I can carry at least carry 3 extras. Oh and support for 16GB of memory would be nice, the price of memory is so cheap there is no reason why I can't have that.

 

Interesting. You've kept it conditioned, yes? That doesn't sound standard. How many cycles does it have?