or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Purported 13" MacBook Pro specs show USB 3.0, Ivy Bridge, no Retina display
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Purported 13" MacBook Pro specs show USB 3.0, Ivy Bridge, no Retina display - Page 2

post #41 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by ewiz77 View Post

Specs looks really bad. I was totally hoping for a new design + retina display :(


Good. The rumor mill has done its job of hurting Apple by repeating false promises.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #42 of 132

I think of  this is a 3gs equivalent. I think this is a dumbed down version of the current 13" with the new ivy bridge and most like likely replace the white plastic macbook dropped a few months back. I think Apple will reserve the Pro name for something more powerful.

 

I feel the next Pro line will all have quad cores and Retinas. I would like to see these new Pro's with all the past rumors listed in a 14" and 16" form factor (3612qm is a quad 35 watt fits perfect for the 14" and the 3720qm and 3820qm for the 16").

 

As a current 17" MBP user I would go for a 16" (no less) and the many people that have that i talk to that have a 13" would like more power but dont really want a 15". and the current 15" user can go lighter or more power. 

 

This would be a wise move for apple as a Pro user is looking for power and a Student/ entry customer might care more about the legacy options (ODD and basic CPU) at a lower price point

 

I think they will keep the current unibody design as a a entry model with a sub $1000 price. even the current 15" Would be nice to have around for about $1299. Dumbed down of course.

 

Just look at how apple is keeping legacy product at lower price points. (ipad 2 at $399 and 3gs $0 and iphone 4 $99) and also notice how they dumbed down the iphone4 from 16Gb to 8gb to help reduce price.

 

I think this is the trend for apple to make it affordable help drive new consumers in.

 

Line up should be like this

 

 

MBA (Ultra-book)

  11"   13"

--at current price $999-$1299--

 

Macbook (Student/Entry)

  13"  ... a 15" later on"?

--New price $999-$1299--

 

 

MBP (Professional Notebook)

 14" 16"

--$1799-$2499-- 

All Quad, All Retina, (would like) All Dedicated GPU's =)

post #43 of 132

How can Apple discover a way to remove the Optical drive of the MacBook Pro 13 and keep the same weight and size? Only if they are using the extra space and weight loss to have more battery, but this is kind of different from all other upgrades that I've seen Apple doing on batteries. Usually they use smaller and more efficient batteries. 

All other info seems plausible, but the weight not changing is the catch.

post #44 of 132

Firewire is still a  valid option altho it is possible to get a converter from thunderbolt to firewire. But a lot of pople are using it for working with sound controllers and video capture cameras. Altho thunderbolt equipped devices make more sense. If they going to release this and there is not going to be an improvement in speed. I am going to have to get alienware m18x and hack mac osx on it.!

post #45 of 132

guess what stupid...firewire is faster than usb 3 too. firewire doesn't need host pc like usb so less overhead but more chipset is more expensive. it's very similar to the apple vs. pc model. apple hardware is better but more expensive.

 

btw, no one has mentioned that bluetooth 4 is also listed in specs. that would be new too.

 

too bad there is no 802.11ac listed. 

post #46 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by EauVive View Post
"OS X" is due for 10.8, and we know 10.8 won’t be shipping in June… So this (alas?) may be consistent. 

 

Screen Shot 2012-06-05 at 10.58.07 AM.png

 

Did you bother to check Apple's website before saying that?

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by bwik View Post

  I had a Macbook Pro in 2007 that was just about as powerful.  It was $3000 though.

 

Really? You think Conroe was anywhere near as powerful as Ivy Bridge is? Honestly?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post
Good. The rumor mill has done its job of hurting Apple by repeating false promises.

 

I hate this so much.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bareimage View Post
If they going to release this and there is not going to be an improvement in speed. I am going to have to get alienware m18x and hack mac osx on it.!

 

Well, you obviously know absolutely nothing about Ivy Bridge or any of the other components in this computer, so enjoy your buggy, crashing, laggy Hackintosh.


Quote:
Originally Posted by wigby View Post
too bad there is no 802.11ac listed. 

 

Do NOT insult other users of this forum. Please edit your post to remove it when you read this.

 

And 802.11n wasn't on the boxes of the first Macs that supported it… because the AirPort family to support it hadn't come out yet, and Apple activated them retroactively.

post #47 of 132

"FireWire? Really? Lol ok"

 

Yes Firewire.  Really. Its much better at moving large files.  MUCH BETTER.  USB makes way too many requests during data transfer, which works for small files, but kills performance on large video files.   Had to back up two drives, one Firewire 400 and one USB.  USB took almost twice as long.  

 

Just a thought,

post #48 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by eksodos View Post

No way will onboard Intel graphics drive a 13" retina display anyway.

 

It can handle a 4K video stream and 4K is higher resolution than a 13" Retina display.

post #49 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by storie View Post

 

BTW this is my first comment ever, how exciting. Lol.

 

Your first comment was definitely more exciting than this guys: 

Quote:
Originally Posted by palisadesapples View Post

I own around $1.2 million of Apple (stock and options)

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #50 of 132

Superdrive?  5400K RPM hard drive?

 

Booooo.

 

Booooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

 

I sure hope this is a fake.

post #51 of 132

I hope they keep the optical drive.  Not to use, necessarily, but because you can pull it out and add a second drive, such as an SSD or a large capacity drive.  If they remove the optical drive, there will be no room to do this.

 

And don't give me this thunderbolt crap.  I want a single piece of hardware, not a bunch of dongles hanging off cables.

post #52 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrail View Post
I hope they keep the optical drive.  Not to use, necessarily, but because you can pull it out and add a second drive, such as an SSD or a large capacity drive.  If they remove the optical drive, there will be no room to do this.

 

And don't give me this thunderbolt crap.  I want a single piece of hardware, not a bunch of dongles hanging off cables.

 

So you want them to keep it so that you don't use it at all and then have to have a dongle hanging off a cable to use. I see.

post #53 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by palisadesapples View Post

I have been motivating my 9 yr old twins to perform their onerous Kumon and deluge of work to get credits to purchase the mac 15 " air when released this summer.  Hope we get it this time around around $1300-1500 each.  

Will be a goldmine/seller I believe.  I own around $1.2 million of Apple (stock and options) - the stock should start its run shortly - no way hedge funds are not all in by Tuesday apple release/conference in SF

humble brag!. so you signed up to say that you own 1.4 million... and your kids need help in the form of "kumon"?...
post #54 of 132

Firewire port: for people with PowerMac G4/G5 era equipment and hardware from Apple and third parties like LaCie.

 

No one makes Firewire devices any more.  They should replace the Firewire 800 jack with an additional USB port and allow third party companies to make a thunderbolt-connected hub with Firewire ports (heck, even throw in a Firewire 400 port in the hub for the real technical dinosaur equipment).

 

Come on, Apple, move on to USB 3.0.

post #55 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by eksodos View Post

 

People said exactly the same before the last refresh. The argument last time was the resolution might be lower but it's better quality in the Pro.

 

No way will onboard Intel graphics drive a 13" retina display anyway.

Ummmm... You havent read the specs for the HD4000 have you? The HD 4000 is capable of driving 4k (3840x2160), which is way more than what is needed for a retina display on any of Apple's current laptops

 

 

post #56 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by hypercommunist View Post

Superdrive?  5400K RPM hard drive?

Booooo.

Booooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

I sure hope this is a fake.

These half expected and half disappointing specs historically mean that it is legit. Those that try to pull a fast on over on the Internet tend to up all the specs to levels that are so good that we want to believe them. Giving "meh" specs goes against their entire reasoning for creating the fake.

This is not a flagship machine. This may not even be a MacBook Pro or one that you can buy outside the education market.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #57 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by vandil View Post
Come on, Apple, move on to USB 3.0.

 

FireWire 800 is often faster than USB 3. 

post #58 of 132

I am seriously hoping this is fake.  These specs are terrible, let alone even calling this atrocious thing a "Mac Book Pro".

post #59 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Negafox View Post
I am seriously hoping this is fake.  These specs are terrible, let alone even calling this atrocious thing a "Mac Book Pro".

 

The specs are better than those of the current 13". You were saying?


I don't think this is legit either, but come on.

post #60 of 132

Well, I had a 2.33ghz core duo macbook pro in early 2007.  It had 3GB of RAM and eventually a 500GB hard drive so yeah, I'd say that was comparable.  Not as good as this new product, but not like a very meaningful leap, either.

 

The main advance appears to be unibody structure, IMO.  Now that was a giant leap.

post #61 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

The specs are better than those of the current 13". You were saying?


I don't think this is legit either, but come on.

The same thing I thought of the current 13" as well.  I bought my wife an HP laptop for $999 a year and a half ago that has better specs than that.

 

I have been holding off on upgrading my 2009 17" MacBook Pro waiting for a more significant upgrade.  I am curious to see the other models, but this supposed leak is not encouraging.

post #62 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by d00d View Post

Last paragraph makes a lot of sense. Apple is really known to fragment their product line. Having three distinct models in for the 13" sounds really likely. (end I have no idea what I'm talking about)

Fixed it for you.
post #63 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwik View Post
Well, I had a 2.33ghz core duo macbook pro in early 2007.  It had 3GB of RAM and eventually a 500GB hard drive so yeah, I'd say that was comparable.

 

Do you understand that processors change? I'm honestly asking here. Unless you don't know that, you can't possibly think your Merom was anything like what this will be.

 

RAM also changes.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Negafox View Post
I have been holding off on upgrading my 2009 17" MacBook Pro waiting for a more significant upgrade.  I am curious to see the other models, but this supposed leak is not encouraging.

 

I pose the same question to you, then.

post #64 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrail View Post

I hope they keep the optical drive.  Not to use, necessarily, but because you can pull it out and add a second drive, such as an SSD or a large capacity drive.  If they remove the optical drive, there will be no room to do this.

 

And don't give me this thunderbolt crap.  I want a single piece of hardware, not a bunch of dongles hanging off cables.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

So you want them to keep it so that you don't use it at all and then have to have a dongle hanging off a cable to use. I see.

 

If he doesn't use an optical drive, then why would he need a dongle to an optical drive?

Sometimes you just type and don't read...

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #65 of 132

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Do you understand that processors change? I'm honestly asking here. Unless you don't know that, you can't possibly think your Merom was anything like what this will be.

 

RAM also changes.


 

 

I pose the same question to you, then.

X86 CPU performance has largely been stagnant over the past few years. The emphasis has been on efficiency rather than performance. Seeing Apple bump the default RAM to 6 or 8 GB would be nice though.

post #66 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Negafox View Post

I am seriously hoping this is fake.  These specs are terrible, let alone even calling this atrocious thing a "Mac Book Pro".


I feel identical man.... with all the hype this thing has been getting (especially on AI posts etc) since FEB when my 2007-Trusty-Rusty-MBP chip started smoking on the mobo, I have seen the rumours on AI and thus decided to wait for these 'wonderful' specs.... if these are truely what is going to be released, then that basically wipes the last 100 front page headlines of 'dont upgrade now..... wait for the revolutionary change!!!' right off the map.... well said.

post #67 of 132

These specs are completely believable.  Apple is well known for releasing less-than-stellar updates.  Their quality is excellent, and the upgrade is reasonable, but it's not really exciting at all.  At a bare minimum they should ship it with a 1440x900 screen - a 1280x800 one is just soooo lame.  Glad to see Firewire is retained - it's still very useful (and a lot cheaper than Thunderbolt). Needs more RAM and a 7200-rpm drive.

post #68 of 132

THIS IS FAKE.  APPLE REFERS TO IT'S OPERATING SYSTEM AS OS X, NOT MAC OS X

 

If this, indeed, from a source inside Apple, it is, at best, a misdirection.  The rumor mill is getting too close to 100% accurate, and Apple is trying to maintain the guessing...

 

Tom

post #69 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post
If he doesn't use an optical drive, then why would he need a dongle to an optical drive?

Sometimes you just type and don't read...

 

I'm tiptoeing around the nonsense that is "put it in so I don't use it".

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Negafox View Post
X86 CPU performance has largely been stagnant over the past few years.

 

So a 2012 laptop isn't faster than a 2006 laptop. Good to know.

post #70 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Negafox View Post

The same thing I thought of the current 13" as well.  I bought my wife an HP laptop for $999 a year and a half ago that has better specs than that.

 

I have been holding off on upgrading my 2009 17" MacBook Pro waiting for a more significant upgrade.  I am curious to see the other models, but this supposed leak is not encouraging.

I wouldn't expect it on a tick generation. You should know by now that Apple rarely competes on specs to price point ratios. I buy them too. There are times when Apple is really competitive on specs. Most of the time they aren't, but if the machine I want doesn't have known issues, I end up paying it. Typically I don't buy directly from Apple. I either look for a cheaper price from a third party retailer, or I look for one nearby that can handle warranty repairs if I have any problems later on. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Do you understand that processors change? I'm honestly asking here. Unless you don't know that, you can't possibly think your Merom was anything like what this will be.

 

RAM also changes.


 

 

I pose the same question to you, then.

Merom was actually a pretty solid change in itself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Negafox View Post

X86 CPU performance has largely been stagnant over the past few years. The emphasis has been on efficiency rather than performance. Seeing Apple bump the default RAM to 6 or 8 GB would be nice though.

They've improved at the lower power levels. Perhaps this is what you meant by efficiency? Sandy Bridge mobile cpus can handle an impressive amount of things that would have choked prior cpu generations.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ttollerton View Post

 

 

If this, indeed, from a source inside Apple, it is, at best, a misdirection.  The rumor mill is getting too close to 100% accurate, and Apple is trying to maintain the guessing...

 

Tom

That's a good catch, but it was a recent change. I haven't noticed any recent packaging. It's easy to fake either way. Being printed doesn't change that. Print out faked label, photograph with camera phone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

I'm tiptoeing around the nonsense that is "put it in so I don't use it".

 

 

So a 2012 laptop isn't faster than a 2006 laptop. Good to know.

Blame intel for starting the mhz myth in the first place.

post #71 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

Blame intel for starting the mhz myth in the first place.

 

No, really, is THAT what he's basing his statements on?!

post #72 of 132

The spec's many are hoping for would make the MAC Pro the same computer as the MAC Air. Why would Apple do that. They can just add a faster processor to the Air and meet all your needs. The Pro fills a different area. Many using the Pro can move to an Air but why would they make the Pro be the same computer as the Air.

post #73 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by storie View Post

Guess what?

 

One simple reason I believe it's not genuine.

 

On any MacBook packaging with this kind of label, the amount of graphics memory is always printed after the graphics card.

 

Example: Intel HD Graphics 3000 with 384MB of DDR3 SDRAM shared with main memory

 

Yet on this label: Intel HD Graphics 4000

 

Is it expected that Apple would mention less on this label?

 

BTW this is my first comment ever, how exciting. Lol.

For a FTP, I would say GOOD CALL!!!.  Thanks for the contribution.

post #74 of 132

Since they deleted the old white MB they have been lacking an entry level model for schools, college kids, etc.

 

So maybe they have downgraded the 13" MBP to a 13" MB making it the new entry level MB at $799.

 

Keep the old design and CD/DVD drive to make it a good all round entry level model.

 

Makes perfect sense to me - that way you get back to 3 distinct lines again, with updated MBAs and redesigned MBPs.

post #75 of 132

Maybe this model is going to be the MacBook, not the MacBook Pro.  MacBook users don't really need retina displays.  And maybe the case is plastic instead of aluminum. Just a WILD A$$ GUESS.    It's worth a shot.

post #76 of 132

Why in the world would Apple bring back the "MacBook", save to call all their computers by that name?

post #77 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Negafox View Post

X86 CPU performance has largely been stagnant over the past few years. The emphasis has been on efficiency rather than performance. Seeing Apple bump the default RAM to 6 or 8 GB would be nice though.

Efficiency IS performance.

You seem to be equating 'performance' with clock speed. That's not the case. Greater instructions per clock in today's processors mean that performance is significantly better even at the same clock speed.

For example. I have the same 2.33 GHz Core 2 Duo highlighted below. A current 2.7 GHz i7 iMac is roughly 4 times the performance, even though the clock speed is only about 15% greater.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwik View Post

Well, I had a 2.33ghz core duo macbook pro in early 2007.  It had 3GB of RAM and eventually a 500GB hard drive so yeah, I'd say that was comparable.  Not as good as this new product, but not like a very meaningful leap, either.

The main advance appears to be unibody structure, IMO.  Now that was a giant leap.

I have that same system and would have upgraded a long time ago if money weren't tight. A current MacBook Pro is at least twice as fast and more like three times as fast in many tests. Clock speed doesn't tell you everything. Equally importantly, my system MAXES OUT at 3 GB of RAM - and more RAM greatly improves performance. And that's not even considering the video performance.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #78 of 132
If this is the new '$999' entry level non SSD notebook, then I'm sure Apple will sell at ton of them. Remember, Apple needs to keep a legacy machine in the lineup that hits the $999 price point, as many schools/universities had relied upon that pricepoint/model as their Go2 machine.

Hell, if this model is $999, I might pass up a $1700 Macbook Pro refresh for it. With a refreshed chassis, Apple might take away the ability to swap out the hard drive easily, and if that's the case, I'm buying the last unibody model I can get my hands on and ride that machine out as long as I can.
post #79 of 132

Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Efficiency IS performance.
You seem to be equating 'performance' with clock speed. That's not the case. Greater instructions per clock in today's processors mean that performance is significantly better even at the same clock speed.
For example. I have the same 2.33 GHz Core 2 Duo highlighted below. A current 2.7 GHz i7 iMac is roughly 4 times the performance, even though the clock speed is only about 15% greater.
I have that same system and would have upgraded a long time ago if money weren't tight. A current MacBook Pro is at least twice as fast and more like three times as fast in many tests. Clock speed doesn't tell you everything. Equally importantly, my system MAXES OUT at 3 GB of RAM - and more RAM greatly improves performance. And that's not even considering the video performance.

I am talking about real-world benchmarks (application performance), not clock speed. Clock speed became irrelevant with the demise of the Intel Pentium 4.

post #80 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Negafox View Post
I am talking about real-world benchmarks (application performance), not clock speed. Clock speed became irrelevant with the demise of the Intel Pentium 4.

 

Then you're even more wrong, so I'm not sure what you're after… 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Purported 13" MacBook Pro specs show USB 3.0, Ivy Bridge, no Retina display