Apple introduces Penryn-based MacBooks and MacBook Pros - Page 7

hehe...

Just gotta say Mac Mini is over due for a redesign as well.

Not directly aimed at you, but more at lots of people in this topic, but still.

You have to compare apples with aplles (heheh).

Configure a Sony Vaio or Dell XPS M1330 comparable to the Macbook and it's not THAT much more expensive you'll see, cheaper even depending on your needs. Sure, a 15 inch inspiron with all the base stuff made of cheap plastic will cost you less, but you can't compare it imo, I've used it in real life and it's just not "nice" to use, as with most sub $1000 notebooks.

Also, you're complaining about speed, but Apple uses the fastest stuff out there that'll fit in a 1 inch thick laptop.

That being said, how would a 15 inch, 1280x800 Macbook with a 1.6-1.8 GHz processor, 120gig HD, 1 gig RAM, Bluetooth as a BTO for say $800-$900 look in Apple's lineup? With those specs and at that pricepoint you'll convince a ton of casual computer users to go apple, without comprimising overall build and parts quality. For 70% of people out there 1.6 is fast enough, and 13inch is too small cause they can't read the tiny letters.

You might argue it'd look weird compared to the regular MB, but look at Dell's lineup, XPS buyers ain't complaingin about the cheaper Inspiron 1525...

Strategy games are not that GPU-heavy most of the time, also, in terms of future-proofing, supporte rendering technologies is more important than amount of VRAM, since both cards have the same GPU, I'd go for the 256MB version. It's not like OSX or whatever it's called byt then's GUI will need 512MB of dedicated VRAM in 4 years...

So it's pointless to have more than VGA resolution (640x480) on a 17" screen? That's what Standard Definition is.

Assuming you don't need the 17", (as someone already pointed out) I'd personally not spend an extra $500 for .1 Ghz extra processing 'power' and 50 extra gigs of HD space.

Sounds like you work with some fairly big files, but I'd have a big honkin' fireware HD at home both for Time Machine backups and for storage.

Not sure how valuable the extra video memory is for the kind of iMovie stuff you do.

I'd spend the extra $500 on Logic Studio instead.

I can see your point, but then again, you can wait forever for the next great feature to be added to a platform.

But if you look at it from a usability stand-point, regardless of the specs, what platform gives you all the great things that is the Mac along with XP/Vista compatibility? And run both OS platforms simultaniously using virtual-machine technology?

Having said the above, it may be possible the Penryn/Centrino 2 (aka Montevina) refresh (or completely new MBP) may include the "UltraDrive" (aka Blu-ray). Indeed, if traditional product schedules are observed, then release of this product will be around the next MacWorld Expo. But who knows, it could be sooner than we all expect.

YipYipYipee

Yippe, your a fucknut!

No, just saying that on any screen that small, you just don't see the HD 'presence' that differentiates HD content. Diminishing returns.

I'm pondering the same two options, but my "heavy use" application will be Aperture. The middle option also has twice the L2 cache, although I don't know the performance boost that provides. The extra 50 GB disk space and the 0.1 increase in CPU speed are non-factors, so the $500 seems steep for the extra VRAM and L2 cache.

Aperture would probably tax the video card more than the applications you listed, so the 512 MB VRAM would definitely benefit. But even with that, right now I'm leaning towards the low-end model and maxing out the RAM to 4 GB ($100 from 3rd party vendor). It might not give Aperture the same kick as the incrased VRAM, but it would benefit overall system performace, especially since I normally have more than on app open at any given time.

Good points and ever since Apple joined the Intel camp, they had to follow Intel's road map and schedule like any other PC and notebook manufacturer.

For example, based on past evidence, I don't think Apple wanted to release the MacBook Air with the Merom based CPU. I believe they wanted Penryn, but due to delays in Intel's 45nm manufacturing process, both Penryn CPUs and Centrino 2 (aka Montevino) mobile chipset screwed up the release schedule. Along with everything else in Apple's computer line.

So, let's admit it, Apple is doing some damage control here. Indeed, I expect Apple to be back on track by the next Mac Expo. In the meantime, let's continue to see what Apple springs on us on Tuesdays.

YipYipYipee

I am going to go with the base model. If I can somewhat function with a 2002 Gateway notebook with an 800Mhz processor, I think the base Macbook Pro will work. Now, I'm off to the Apple store to compare glossy vs. regular screens.

Then MACMALL HERE I COME!!!! FREE PARALLELS REBATE and $70 EPSON PRINTER REBATE!!!

Keep in mind that the $70 on an Epson will get eaten up in ink cartridges.
If you really need a printer, think something like Cannon where you can at least replace just color tanks that run out, and not have to replace an entire cartridge just because one color runs out.

But how fun. My yellow/blue carts runneth low in envy.

Well, from a theoritcal point of view, 6 vs 3 MB cache is a very minimal speed bump for most apps.

I'm pretty sure certain types of apps do benefit from extra cache though, but I have no idea which ones. I suppose adding an effect to a big photo in photoshop is pretty cache-heavy, but I'm not sure.

For general computing usage, let's say if 3 MB cache gives you a 96% hitrate (probability next instruction needed will be in cache), where 6Mb will give you 97.5%. These aren't real numbers, just making 'em up to make the principle clear.

If you're adding a certain filter to say a 10MB picture however, I can imagine you'll benefit pretty well from the larger cache, but again, I don't know anything about photo processing and stuff yet so I'm not sure.

I don't know what the word "presence" is supposed to mean. Resolution is resolution. The only downside I can see is having to convert 720 or 1080 lines to this squirrelly resolution on the MBP (1680x1050 is it?) That means at 720, roundoff error would give you 45 stripes down the screen, whereas 1080 would give you 105. Maybe 105 is narrow enough that it wouldn't wander off far enough in the width of a stripe to be noticeable, but 45 will be. All this is assuming you're using the middle 90% of your 10x16 screen to watch 9x16 video. I don't know if you can chop the ends of the picture off and watch it full height, but if you can, that's 70 and 30 stripes respectively. 30 is going to be very noticeable! In this day and age, if 10x16 screens are the standard, they should be either 1280x800, to display 720p in native resolution, or 1920x1200, to display 1080p in native resolution. Any other gotch-eyed resolution and you're just recreating those cheap 768-line LCD TVs with the 24 broad stripes across every picture due to roundoff error.

Personally, I'm going for the middle model because I'll be using 3D intensive applications and the extra VRAM could be useful.

Whether you choose a lower or higher CPU really doesn't matter. So long as it is a 'Penryn' processor. This is because this new CPU has the SSE4 extensions. And when used with software that can take advantage of these extensions, you should expect significantly better performance than the previous 'Merom' processor based MBPs.

If I were you, and the use of the MBP is 90% work and 10% play, 256MB VRAM is probably sufficient and I'd use part of the $500 savings to purchase AppleCare and a case.

YipYipYipee

Correct.


Correct.


Wrong. You even said above that FSB is "quad rate" and RAM is "double rate". There's no point comparing the base clock speeds, because the busses work in different ways. The FSB has a higher bandwidth (in bits/second).

The correct answer to altacleets's question is:

FSB and the memory bus are two different things.

The FSB connects the processor to the motherboard northbridge, and the northbridge connects to RAM on the memory bus. The maximum speed the northbridge supports is 667 MHz DDR2 RAM. 800 MHz DDR2 RAM would be beneficial, if only the northbridge supported it.

If you mean from across a living room, yes, at arm's length absolutely not. The difference between HD and SD was clearly visible to me on a 15" Apple notebook. Go download an Apple Quicktime HD movie, make an iPod resolution version of it and play both on a notebook.

Actually, I was looking at the Epson CX9400 which have individual cartridges.

I was wondering is the 2.6 a Penryn also? I know its an upcharge...but wanted to make sure since it says nothing on the spec sheet about the 6 mb cache with the 2.6?

If I had the money, what would be the difference between the 2.5 and 2.6?

Thanks for your help

GB

True of course a mbp comes with osx and great build quality so you can't really compare it to a dell or w/e I guess what I was trying to get as was the fact that alot of people have been holding off upgrading their laptops for the new macbook to come out and I personaly am a little underwhelmed and aren't going to upgrade. I would expect apples mac book pro to have all the latest components available (even if there at a high premium) and considering you can get a slot loading bluray drive in a dell why not in the new mbp? I am a big hd fan and can't justify splashing 2k on a macine without it atm! The only question now is whether to give in to the vaio or try and hold on till macworld and the chance of a real update!

That sort of thing helps, but ink is simply expensive. It probably helps to look up some site that tests printers to see what's the most reasonable printer in terms of cost per page. In the end, the cheapest page is still one that's not printed.

No, it's not just a die shrink. It also adds SSE4.1, and that is revolutionary for video processing algorithms (40% faster at the same clock speed).

I can't believe I'm defending Lundy, but that is a full DTR that's about a pound and a half heavier. Look, Apple's laptops are thin and lights. They're designed to be relatively portable while still be very powerful. The "Pro" in the Macbook Pro isn't the same "Pro" as the MacPro. Its a bit of a flaw in the new Intel naming scheme. There are much more powerful desktop replacement notebooks on the market and a lot of them are also cheaper. How good a deal and how good the feature set is depends on what you're looking for and what you're willing to pay. Apple's one size fits all doesn't work for everyone despite what some around here would like to believe. That being said, just because what they have doesn't fit one user doesn't mean it isn't perfect for someone else.

Sorry, what exactly is wrong with the case? That seems like the least important aspect about the MBP to me, since it's still pretty hot looking and does what a case should do (keeps the fiddler crabs out). How would you improve on it? Gold plating and encrusted with diamonds, mohagony hand rests and mother-of-perl trim? Yeah, Apple, why don't you offer that as an option, hm? And while you're at it, make me a sandwich.

They should also drop DVD drives since they are cutting into their itunes rentals and movies.

Presence = that sense that the image is in the room with you, nearly 3-D. The thing one buys HD for in the first place.
Not talking about raw numbers... I'm talking about perception.
You obviously know your HD well, so you know the 42" at < 10' feet rule. That rule is about perception. I owned a 32" tube HD set before my 42" ED set, and at the distances I used them at, their pictures were indistinguishable. IN fact the Ed actually looks a bit better.

Just saying that small screens (I particularly love it when people call for HD iPhones) don't produce the same 'pop' that makes HD worth the extra $$ that really big screens do.

Too many videophiles get caught up in the "turn it up to 11" syndrome.

You are always hilarious. I'm beginning to get the feeling that Apple could sell you a turd. They really can't do any wrong in your eyes, can they?


I am lamenting the lack of case redesign, but I'm not mad about it. I was thinking before hand that the chance of the case redesign happening with this refresh was about 50/50. Hopefully they are waiting for Montevina rather than Nehalem for the case redesign.

When people talk about the case redesign, they are talking about at least three things:

• Magnetic latch
• MacBook (Air) style keyboard
• Easier HDD upgrade a-la MacBook

Some people also seem to be hoping for a slightly thinner case, but I don't know if that's likely or even possible. Perhaps Apple can shave a maximum of 2 mm off.



Normal for Apple, yes. Take the time to look at every single other computer manufacturer's line-up, and you will find that every laptop over about $599 has a DVD burner in it. A combo drive in $1099 laptop is a seriously unfunny joke. As is forcing people to buy extra CPU power and HDD space they don't necessarily want just so that they can have a DVD burner.


This is true. Beyond that though, looking at Intel's price difference between the 2.5 and 2.6 GHz chips, Apple's charge isn't anywhere near as outrageous as the cost of its memory upgrades.


When you restrict your search to just 13" widescreen portables, the MacBook does still compare well (apart from the combo drive stupidity), especially on the processor front now that it has Penryn. A similarly configured Dell M1330 (processor bumped to 2.0 GHz, bluetooth added and battery bumped to 56 WHr) is slightly more expensive at $1149, but it does give the purchaser the option of sacrificing a bit of CPU power in order to shave $100 off (drop the processor to 1.66 GHz and the price is $1049)

So, if you want a 13" laptop with DVD burner, 1 GB RAM and 120 GB HDD, you can get the Dell for $1049. But to get a DVD burner from Apple, you have to pay at least $1299. Yes, you get other stuff thrown in that makes the asking price good value, but if $1049 is already stretching your budget you aren't going to move to $1299.

If you relax the criteria and start comparing with 15.4" widescreen machines, things get really embarrassing for the MacBook. Whilst the 15.4" screen makes the laptops bigger and heavier, in many consumers' eyes, the 15.4" screen is better value, because it's bigger (even though the resolution is the same as the 13.3" screens so you don't get any extra real-estate).

The Dell Inspiron 1525 with 15.4" screen, 3 GB RAM, 250 GB HDD, 2.0 GHz CPU, 802.11a/b/g and bluetooth costs $969 and to most folks, that's going to make the MacBook look like very poor value. All the other major manufacturers (HP, Toshiba, Acer, Asus, Sony, Lenovo) have similar configuration laptops.

So, in conclusion, there are a few things that suck about this update:

• Combo drive on entry-level MacBook is taking the piss
• Entry-level cost of 15.4" screen Apple laptop is still $1999 (if Apple can do this well with a niche 13.3" MacBook, imagine how much market share it could take if it offered a 15.4" version alongside)
• The highest-resolution option on the 15.4" MacBook Pro is 1440 x 900 (other manufacturers offer up to 1680 x 1050). I don't give a stuff about whether such a resolution is necessary for video watching (it isn't) - it gives you more screen real-estate to work with and that's the attraction.

You're weird.

Sure I can. Because pretty much every laptop on the market has it. Because for sure every laptop that goes for 1000 and up does and because it adds nothing to the cost. If anything apple is wasting money buying a drive they will only use in two models (macbook and mac mini), instead of just streamlining the process and just giving them all the same drive.

The price difference between the two models is 200 bucks in canada, with that you get double the ram and 40 gigs more hd space, that sensible enough to differentiate the two models.

For example:
My friend wants a new macbook and is a potential switcher. She doesn't want the more expensive one, doesn't need what it has to offer, no matter what model she gets I'm gonna toss the ram and up it to 4 gigs for her. It was already hard to convince her to go mac because she didn't want to spend that much money, but now I gotta convince her to spend 200 more just so she can do the one thing the other one can't do but the 800 dollar toshiba she wanted in the first place can.

Apple has no need to use a 2002 tactic like holding dvd burning over customer's heads to force an upgrade. It just turns people off.

Can you offer good reasons why the MBP needs to have a Combo drive? What can the combo drive do that the superdrive can't? Or do want to save 0-5 dollars off the price of a new MBP?

Personally, I'd wait for the refreshed (or all new) MBP with Penryn/Centrino 2 and perhaps the "UltraDrive" (aka Blu-ray) at the Mac Expo or sooner.

If you settle for the VAIO, then you'll probably always regret you can't get access to the Mac experience and applications. And I am writing this message ON a VAIO! \

YipYipYipee

The Combo drive can read DVDs, but cannot record on DVD media. So, if this is an absolute requirement, then she'll have to consider moving up to the 2.4GHz model.

Now, next thing is to consider the experience of using OS X vs Windows.

The typical qualifiers is what's more important? Productivity or Creativity? Both? Then get the Mac, says I a longtime Windows user. But seriously, if she wants her lifestyle to be productive, the best choice is the Mac. Simply because the included iLife '08 matches most peoples needs and probably more. Indeed, I suspect that $800 Toshiba has plenty of trial-ware, but not much which she can own.

So, my question to her is do you want to buy the $800 that's good technology, but doesn't do much out of the box? Or purchase something that includes one of the best computing experiences in the world and is useful right out of the box?

YipYipYipee

Hey man I agree with you %100 that's why I'm a mac user, but lots of people don't see it what way, money talks.

And she doesn't want the 2.4ghz model, she doesn't care about all the other stuff it has to offer, she just wants to be able to burn a dvd, in 2008 that's not a lot to ask, there is no reason to not have it across the board.

I think the 13" Macbook's major problem is that it can't decide what kind of laptop it want to be. It has the CPU of fairly high end 13" notebook, but the GPU of an entry level notebook. Things were clearer when Apple had two clearly defined levels of notebook.

Notice how they always "forget" about the weight and thickness when claiming "OMG u can get a PC with more feeeeeeetures for like half the price..."

Heavy and thick is cheaper to make, by far.

It's a nice game to play - challenge them to find a cheaper but comparable PC and they will always bring some 4 kg monster that is 1.5 to 2 inches thick. LOL

I absolutely agree the SuperDrive should be included across the board. I was just trying to help the writer with different views and some ammo to continue considering the Mac, despite the higher cost.

YipYipYipee

I find the extra $200 to get a SuperDrive on the MacBook annoying, too. You've got to wonder why Combo drives even exist any more; as somebody pointed out, the price differential is about $5.00. Maybe the cheapest MacBook is what a lot of parents are buying for their kids going off to school, and they don't want them downloading a lot of porn and burning it to DVD? They figure the (used to be) 60 GB HD isn't big enough to store much onboard. If that's the market, maybe the -$200.00 could be called an "Educational Discount!"

Based on the ridiculous statements that the update is "disappointing" because there's no magnetic latch ......

You can't tell me that anybody "waited six months" for a magnetic latch that they didn't even know was coming. It's silly. Well, wait another six months and try again.

Duplicate--sorry!

If the $1099 had the Superdrive, then there would be almost no upsell incentive to the $1299 model. They want you to buy the more expensive model.

Corporations are not in business to let you buy the cheapest thing - standard business 101 is to sell you exactly the maximum that you will pay.

Once you are in the store, and asking what the difference is, a lot of customers will cough up the $200 for the burner. Some won't, and that is why the $1099 model is there.

That, and the fact that schools do not want DVD burners, are the answers to the question.

As I recall, there really isn't any difference other than clock speed.

For now, the 2.5GHz MBP configuration is the best value for money in my opinion.

YipYipYipee