Apple notebook overhaul rumored for mid-October - Page 3

So you agree that since Apple doesn't have any other technical advancement to offer for MBPs so they keep things like BL keyboards for MBPs only. And in this way they can eventually stand out in competition with MBs. Which means that Apple is actually fooling us. It also reminds me our last discussion when I asserted that computers aren't priority for Apple now. They are busy with music players and cellphones. I am pretty sure they can come up with really cool ideas to revamp the MBPs, if they focus on computers also.

Praise Jesus. Someone sees the light.

Nope. Teckstud is right, see here.

This was part of the "CD-RW debacle". This was before DVD-ROM/CD-RW combo drives were cost effective; Apple put DVD-ROM drives in everything whilst their competitors were using CD-RW drives instead. Apple later switched from DVD-ROM to CD-RW, and later to DVD-ROM/CD-RW combo drives.

still no list of competitor laptops with backlit keyboards...

I don't really care about the backlit keyboard. However, personally for me the most important feature I want is a 1920x1200 screen in a 15.4" macbook pro. I am very tired of waiting to upgrade my macbook to a macbook pro. Both Dell and Thinkpads have them.

I also think Apple has to do something about their pricing. I can get a dell xpsm1350 with a 2.4ghz processor, 4gb ram, 320GB 7200rpm drive, and 1920x1200 screen for $1500 and then run OSx86 on it.

I can't even buy a 15.4" macbook pro with a 320Gb drive or with a 1920x1200 screen. The closest I can come to that from apple is a 17" macbook pro with a 2.5ghz processor, 4GB ram, 200GB 7200rpm drive, and a 1920x1200 screen for $3149. Its over twice the price and I don't want the bigger size or the weight.

I don't see the ipods lower prices as being the reason for the lower margin issue which was mentioned as being necessary so others can't compete. I have no clue what that could be but hopefully it will involve macbooks because right now they are seriously behind windows laptops as far as hardware is concerned.

That was a dumb decison. The move to high capacity is great, but at the loss of writing your data made no sense.

http://www.alienware.com/products/ar...de=SKU-DEFAULT

There you go

Sorry had to do it... even though I am looking at getting a mac as my next laptop, I did have an Alienware and it was awesome... Untill well it overheated and the CPU took a crap...

Sure would be great if Apple would apply their "Twice as Fast, Half the Price" approach to the MacBook Air

Hell, I'd settle for, "Just as Slow, Half the Price"

I never said that. I said they will keep the BL keyboard in the high-end machines until they have another high-end option to offer in the MBP which makes trickling down the BL keyboard to MB feasible. The MBP has FW800, DL-DVI, Dedicated GPU, High-Res display, aluminum build, it's thinner, EC34 slot, faster HW, etc.


It truly boggles the mind how posters like you (there are a few of your hear) can have such warped ideas of the obvious. Yet giving you the benefit of the doubt you post the facts and links to the relevant data and still choose to ignore the obvious. I don't know if you are purposely being obtuse or have some physical or mental handicap that prevents cognitive thinking but posting to you takes away from the thread as it's just a repetition an reposting as you twist what someone else has said and then deny the quoted words you previously wrote so I'm gonna have to ignore your posts again because I certainly can't help further you knowledge and you certainly aren't help me. Ciao!

Look now you are being rude...really...Problem with u is that u have started loving Apple Inc. too much and taking it as your religion...u talk about cognitive thinking..I would say that you are not ready to see beyond the obvious...I like Apple when it comes to innovations, elegance but not when it comes to their cheap business and marketing policies like pricing their products in a way that would not make any sense et all...I think u definitely have some blocks in your mind which are preventing you from seeing things rationally..you are welcome not to reply to my posts as you aren't a help to me as well..

LOL Quite funny as I wasn't even tryin' to search for a notebook that has a backlit keyboard. But since you found one I guess I can say to what's his face that he's been pwned.

I'm actually ROTFL now because its' so late here in Japan and I'm giddy. I feel like we're on another plane talking about backlit keyboards.

I'm looking at my mobile with it's 1980's backlit keypad.

You're not thinking straight, are you?

That wasn't a list, that was one laptop that costs more than a MacBook Pro.

There is absolutely no business case for adding backlighting to the MacBook keyboard.

The Dell Studio laptops have backlit keyboard options....

I agree that solipsism went a bit over the top there with the personal attack, but in this case it's you that's not seeing things rationally. Where are all the laptops at the MacBook's price (or lower) with backlit keyboards?

Now, if you want to complain about the bottom-end macbook still having a DVD-ROM/CD-RW drive instead of a DVD±RW drive, be my guest. That really is a joke, because now even laptops a third of the price of the MacBook have DVD±RW drives.

Really? Apple's specification page for the iMac DV 400 MHz (DV meant it had VGA-out, I believe) makes no reference to DVD-ROM that I can see.

http://support.apple.com/kb/SP121


The succeeding model, 500 MHz, doesn't mention it:

http://support.apple.com/kb/SP64


The one after that, up to 600 MHz, released in early 2001, very clearly only mentions CD-ROM and CD-R/W:

http://support.apple.com/kb/SP112


Summer 2001 (up to 700 MHz)... no mention of DVD-ROM:

http://support.apple.com/kb/SP109


It's not until the release of the iMac G4 in January 2002 can I find any mention at all on Apple's specification pages about DVD-ROM (Combo Drive).

http://support.apple.com/kb/SP93

You're right and you can get the option for an additional $50, which makes the cheapest option $699. While that is certainly proof that there are keyboards available for even cheap notebooks, even if they aren't widespread by any measure, it doesn't take away from Mr. H's point. Apple would include the feature on all their MB's not just as BTO. As he stated, there just isn't a business reason to push the MB in that area right now. Isn't the MB already the best selling Mac?

Sometimes Apple's own database has gaping holes, hence sites like apple-history being useful. Your first link points to the model released in April 1999, the second to a model released in July 2000, skipping the pertinent October 1999 model. As I said, Apple went from CD-ROM to DVD-ROM drives, but then to CD-RW, and then DVD-ROM/CD-RW combo.

DELL is selling off it's manufacturing plants. They are bleeding. They are trying everything they can do to attract customers.

No his trolling point was to provide proof of laptops with backlit. Whether it's two or "a list" is semantics. Actually I don't even know why he wanted to know. Who cares. Doesn't make a difference if Apple was the only laptop to have backlit. Point was backlit is not soem new found technology. It's old but marketed as PRO. It is in no way a characteristic of being PRO.

MacTracker is the best source for this, but I'll just link to Wikipedia instead of posting screenshots on Flickr. The first iMacs were tray loading and only had CD-ROM drives that could only read. The first slot loading iMacs that came in late 1999 had the option for CD-ROM or DVD-ROM, depending on the model. These were still only readable drives. It wasn't until early 2001 that Apple offered an option in the iMac for a CD-RW. The first SuperDrive came a year later in the swivel-head flat-panel iMac. That was cool design. Still have one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMac_G3...lot-loading.29

It's not trolling, and whether it's two or a list really is not semantics.

If a large proportion of the market was offering backlit keyboards at or below MacBook prices, then there would be a good argument for it being a poor business decision of Apple to leave backlit keyboards out of the MacBook specification. As it is, Apple does not lose out to the rest of the market here so there is no point adding this feature to the MacBook.


It makes a huge difference as to whether it's a good business decision or not. Hardly anyone is going to choose a competitor's laptop over the MacBook based solely on the backlit keyboard issue, because there aren't many competitor laptops with backlit keyboards to buy instead.

As it is, you're just whining because you're unwilling to spend the extra money for a MacBook Pro. Tough.

I agree that it's not new, but it does seem cost prohibitive on a notebook that is already selling so well. I will be getting Pro next time and one of those reasons is for the backlighting. The point I agree with is that it make no business sense to include it on the MB, at this point. If Apple can offer someone better for the keyboard/trackpad area, then I can see them adding it to the MB.

See BL keyboards was a point raised by someone else not by me. My point is that when a company is charging so much money they should provide quality stuff. If they r popular, it does not mean that they start doing nonsense stuff, which basically Microsoft does. You correctly raised the point of DVD ROM vs DVD RW drives. Similarly in hardware category, u can get a better hardware configuration from other companies at lesser price. Thing is when people raise the point that MB and MBPs are doing so fine so everything about them is justified. It doesn't make sense because the difference is Mac OS which stands tall. People primarily buy MBs and MBPs coz of OS X. People pay 1000 $ to buy a MB and it can't even have a card reader what a joke. If any company was producing a decent OS, I am pretty sure Apple would have found the going really tough. Everything about Apple is not so good...That's what I call rationale thinking......

Didn't think anyone responded to this yet or I have missed it,

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-...ist.844.0.html

Check this link. It will give you a view into the possibilities.
Apple historically does not use fast GPU's in ANY of it's notebooks. Or at least they use older ones usually on the market for 2 years or more. They also do not tend to give tremendous speed changes with notebooks from version to version.
I expect the new books to have like a Nvidia 9600+ mobile or ATI HD (Something) in them. You wont see a 9800 or a Dual card solution as they are way too hot and belong in 2" thick PC notebooks with 30 min battery life.
Hope this helps. (I hope they put some sort of quicker ATI personally, as ATI has shown the highest benchmarks for OpenGL and Apple pro app gpu rendering)

Using a chip-over-chip comparison based on price per 1000, this is the most likely upgrade cycle for Apple notebooks. iMacs are not listed as they were updated in April with a special Santa Rosa/Penryn that is not on Intel's pricing sheet. I'm guessing they will be updated in January.

There are few oddities (marked with red triangles) this time around with the small packages an reduced power, which is where my questions lay. For the MBP Apple has the option of choosing a $32 more expensive P9500 that has all the same performance as T9400 but with considerably less power usage. For the 2.26 and 1.4GHz chips there are both a 22 and 35mm^2 chip. The small form factor package has double the L2 Cache, but at a considerable jump in cost. I can't see Apple ruining margins that much for the MB, but they did say their would be lowered margins, but that typical of any product transition.

Anyway, here is my list of what I think we'll see in the next refresh.

MacBook Pro (35mm)
Montevina
Model. . .Speed . . .\tFSB . . .L2 . . TDP \t. .Price
T9600\t. .2.80GHz\t. .1066MHz\t. .6MB\t. .35W\t. .$530
T9400\t. .2.53GHz. .\t1066MHz. .\t6MB\t. .35W\t. .$316
P9500. .\t2.53GHz\t. .1066MHz\t. .6MB\t. .25W. .\t$348 ∆
P8600\t. .2.40GHz. .\t1066MHz. .\t3MB\t. .25W. .\t$241

Santa Rosa
Model. . .Speed . . .\tFSB . . .L2 . . TDP \t. .Price
T9500. .\t2.60GHz. . .800MHz\t. .6MB. .\t35W\t. .$530
T9300. .\t2.50GHz\t. . 800MHz. .\t6MB. .\t35W\t. .$316
T8300. .\t2.40GHz. . .800MHz. .\t3MB. .\t35W\t. .$241


MacBook Air (22mm)
Montevina
Model. . .Speed . . .\tFSB . . .L2 . . TDP \t. .Price
SL9400. .1.86GHz\t. .1066MHz. .\t6MB\t. .17W. .\t$316
SL9300. .1.60GHz\t. .1066MHz. . 6MB . .17W. .\t$284

Santa Rosa
Model. . .Speed . . . \tFSB . . .L2 . . TDP \t. .Price
L770\t. . 1.80GHz\t. . 800MHz\t. .4MB\t. .20W. .\t?
L7500\t. .1.60GHz\t. . 800MHz\t. .4MB. .\t20W. .\t?


MacBook
Montevina (35mm)
Model. . .Speed . . .\tFSB . . .L2 . . TDP \t. .Price
P8600. .\t2.40GHz\t. .1066MHz. .\t3MB\t. .25W. .\t$241
P8400. .\t2.26GHz\t. .1066MHz. .\t3MB\t. .25W. .\t$209

Montevina (22mm)
Model. . .Speed . . .\tFSB . . .L2 . . TDP \t. .Price
SP9400. .2.40GHz. .\t1066MHz\t. .6MB\t. .25W\t. .$316 ∆
SP9300. .2.26GHz. .\t1066MHz. .\t6MB. .\t25W\t. .$284 ∆

Santa Rosa (35mm)
Model. . .Speed . . .\tFSB . . .L2 . . TDP \t. .Price
T8300\t. .2.40GHz\t. . 800MHz\t. .3MB\t. .35W\t. .$241
T8100\t. .2.10GHz. . .800MHz\t. .3MB. .\t35W\t. .$209

Really? Removing the optical drive poses a problem to burning optical media? Who would have thought of that...

You can buy a MacBook Air, if you really want a crippled computer, an optical drive doesn't really take that much space.

Is the sardonicism really necessary?


Crippled implies it can't do what people need it to do. If you need an optical drive then not having one obviously makes it crippled. But if you need a RJ-11 jack then Macs are crippled machines, too, by your definition. What is up for debate is the frequency of use of optical drive are for consumer notebooks. The ripping music argument is much less of an issue than it was a few years ago and will be even less of an issue in a few more years.

As for space, only the battery takes up more space in a notebook and it constraining the engineering options since the drive has to placed in a certain way.

Consider that maybe a good portion of Apples customer base don't want the high resolution screens. Don't get me wrong choice is always good but with matte screens added to the normal screens that would mean a lot of SKU's at each level. In any event if Apple isn't offering resolution options they have made the right choice, for many people the high resolution would be a bug negative.

Of course if Apple ever implements resolution indepedence this would not be a concern.


Then go out and buy that Dell. Don't blame me though if the quality sucks, you would be better off comparing with a quality manufacture. Get one that runs Linux well and you will be all set.

The biggest problem with Apple is that they introduce a model and keep it static until the next update. Apple offers up the best values when the laptops are released as new or updates.

Then don't buy Apple. If you go to the BMW lot and look around and realize they don't have want you go to another manufacture. Same with PCs. Either Apple has what you want or they don't.

If you are interested in Apple software why do you even worry about other hardware? Seriously? Moreso are you even bothering to compare hardware of the same quality. You mention Dell but of late they have been selling crap and as a result have a dwindling customer base.

In any event how many of those features do you need? The only one that I see people having consistant problems with is disk storage and that will always be an issue. You know that it won't be more than a few months after buying a laptop that new storage options will come out, you just can't dwell on it.

As to Apples statements on competitors not being able to compete against new Apple products. I really don't know what to think right now because the iPods did not impress me in that direction. Moreso I don't think the new iPods are the devices that will be impacting margins. Frankly I'm begining to think the old Reality Distortion Field is at work. Maybes the new laptops will be innovative but they are coming awfully late in the context of Apples statements. Apple could get a jump on the rest of the industry just by implementing some of the new battery technologies coming on line.


Dave

Wizard,

"Consider that maybe a good portion of Apples customer base don't want the high resolution screens. Don't get me wrong choice is always good but with matte screens added to the normal screens that would mean a lot of SKU's at each level. In any event if Apple isn't offering resolution options they have made the right choice, for many people the high resolution would be a bug negative.

Of course if Apple ever implements resolution indepedence this would not be a concern."

Apple offers a 1920x1200 option for the 17" - I was just thinking of the same for the 15.4". True it isn't for everyone - but for those of us that plug our macbooks into a 24" screen and run 1920x1200 on it because we run apps which require lots of screenspace like for palettes it is a godsend. Why? well because when we are mobile and not connected to that 24" screen and using a lower resolution our desktops are all messed up and there just isn't the screenspace. I could lug around a 17" pro but I really don't want that extra size and weight when I could get the same screensize on a 15.4".


"Then go out and buy that Dell. Don't blame me though if the quality sucks, you would be better off comparing with a quality manufacture. Get one that runs Linux well and you will be all set."

I think you missed where I said I would run OSx86 - it is the open source version of OSX - not linux. I have owned dells and agree the quality is far below macs - however when a mac costs twice as much it does make you think about getting a dell and running OSX on it. To be honest I would probably not go that route and would instead buy a refurb macbookpro for $1699 instead.


"Then don't buy Apple. If you go to the BMW lot and look around and realize they don't have want you go to another manufacture. Same with PCs. Either Apple has what you want or they don't."

I am only mentioning what I would like to see in a macbook pro. If people didn't tell BMW they wanted ipod integration would BMW have offered it? I want 1920x1200 in a 15.4" machine - I am sure a lot of people that need the extra screen real estate that resolution offers do as well. Sure its not for everyone but Apple offered it as an option for the 17" model and now that panels are available for the 15.4" size its not a big deal to offer it as an option for the 15.4" as well. It is not like they have to redesign anything for it.

"If you are interested in Apple software why do you even worry about other hardware? Seriously? Moreso are you even bothering to compare hardware of the same quality. You mention Dell but of late they have been selling crap and as a result have a dwindling customer base."

Simply because with the open source version of OSX I can run Apple Software on almost any laptop. I agree Apple outclasses all the other pc laptop vendors but like I said twice the cost is twice the cost.

Sony has a $1,000 laptop with built-in Blu-Ray playback. $999 buys a 15.4" 1280x800 screen, 2Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4GB of RAM, 250GB hard drive, and an optical drive that reads Blu-Ray and burns everything else. Granted, the thing weighs 6.4 pounds and only gets 1.5-4 hours of battery life, but that still leaves Apple's offerings looking pretty grim.

Meanwhile, we can't get any kind of Blu-Ray playback on a Mac no matter how much you spend. Is Apple the only computer manufacturer remaining that doesn't offer Blu-Ray? Oh that's right, we Mac users don't need Blu-Ray because Steve feels we're better off paying him $3-per episode or $5 per rental for DVD-quality "HD" content.

Well, if you're disappointed in Apple's version of HD, how is it that you think Sony's 1280 x 800 screen is going to be any better?

Blue Ray can not be far off. Players are selling for under $300 at HHGreg this weekend. It is a matter of time...

The standalone players coming down in price is only one part of the equation. There is still an uncertainty of the need and want by computer users. There is also an engineering aspect to consider: Are there slot loading BRDs that as thin as the current MB/MBP/iMac SuperDrives?

Remember that original 15" CD MBPs didn't have a DL burner in them because they didn't make a DL layer burner thin enough. This was a step backwards from the PBs that did offer DL burning, so i don't think Apple it going to thicken up their notebook design just to accommodate a few geek fantasies.

I don't disagree with anything you say. I doubt we will see BR burners anytime soon though.

I did find a slot loading BRD by Panasonic. It's the thinnest I can find is 12.7mm, while the current MBPs slot loading SuperDrive is 9.5mm thick.

edit: It appears that the 17" MBP and iMacs use a 12.5mm drive, so the Panasonic drive above would fit. However, the price is prohibitive for consumers but could be feasible for professionals even though an external drive would be cheaper and faster than these slim designs.

That's a blu-ray burner. Fingers-crossed that there's a BD-ROM/DVD±RW combo drive that's thin enough. I'm not holding my breath, though.


Firstly, there's more to HD than just the nominal resolution; if the video stream is encoded at a low bit-rate then codec artefacts effectively reduce the resolution. Secondly, on a screen 15.4" in size, a higher resolution than 1280 x 720 isn't necessary because at normal viewing distances the human eye can't resolve more information than that. Thirdly, for machines like the MacBook and MacBook Pro with their DVI out ports, the full 1920 x 1080 of Blu-ray could be exploited when connected to a larger external display.

I'm waiting for the new MacBook Pros, and whilst I would like to have a blu-ray drive it's not a deal-breaker if there isn't one.

Because Apple's version of HD content is 4mbps, where-as Blu-Ray is 25-35mbps. Resolution is not the factor.

Fine, but Sony's screen still can't display any better absolute resolution that what Apple is transmitting. If you want to talk about compression difference that's another matter but so far I don't recall anyone conclusively saying that Apple is over-compressing their content for transmission.

Exactly. People name why they need an optical drive each time this issue comes up. But none of the reasons equate to something that most people have to do on a regular basis.

The main arguments against the optical drive are:
- the media is huge and takes a large amount of space
- most things that were once delivered on CD are available as a download
- the flash drives do a better job than optical for most uses

Now even if you could argue those points away, what cannot be justified is that the optical drive be built-in to a laptop. It can be external. It's now a minority of people who need an optical drive a lot so let them buy a bigger machine and stop loading up every one else.

I'm willing to bet money Apple will release a non-Air laptop without a optical drive by January.

Huh? Screen-resolution is a non-issue. You would clearly see the difference between internet-served 4mbps "HD" content and a 25-35mbps Blu-Ray, even on a 1280x720 screen. You're not seeing the full 1080p image of the Blu-Ray, but on a 15" screen you don't need to. What you will see at that distance and screensize though is the shortcomings of 4mbps "HD" internet-served content.


Then you've got some reading to do:

Appleinsider: iTunes HD Videos Low Bitrate

ZDNET: Don't believe the low-bitrate "Hd" lie

Engadget HD: Sizing Up Apple TV's HD

Internet Video: Is HD Video on the Web Really HD?

Gizmodo: Why HD Video Downloads Aren't Really HD