Sure. It's still integrated Intel graphics which used to be and still is crap. nVidia 9400M was much better than Intel (good if you had one of the nVidia-only models), but still away off compared to discrete graphics.
But why should you care? If Intel is too slow, the discrete nVidia graphics kicks in, so so will never be slowed down by the Intel graphics.
Yeah, I'm not getting people's complaints with the Intel IGP with Nvidia GPU as the powerhouse.
Jobs mentioned the licensing fees were a "bag of hurt".
He's full of it. Why is it not a "bag of hurt" for any other manufacturers? The ONLY reason they don't offer it is because they don't want anything to compete with their "HD Lite" digital downloads.
Yep. Solid upgrades. A few quibbles, but no deal-breakers.
The higher res screen on the 15-incher is good. No anti-glare option for the 1440 x 900, bummer.
i was really hoping for quad-core, now that Vectorworks 2010 finally supports multi-core processors.
No ExpressCard/32 slot, that's not very "Pro"... oh well. It's nice for adding extra FireWire ports. I'll just bundle my cards with my current MBP when I put it up on craigslist.
I wish someone made a FireWire multi-memory-card reader. At least I have a FireWire CompactFlash reader.
No way Apple would have put an i7 in there. A i5 would have been very doubtful.
I thought maybe an i3.
So the question now is, when the inevitable change to Core-i happens, will they just stick with the Intel IGP despite being less powerful though more power efficient or go with a discrete GPU for switched graphics, even though that would probably up the price a bit?
He's full of it. Why is it not a "bag of hurt" for any other manufacturers? The ONLY reason they don't offer it is because they don't want anything to compete with their "HD Lite" digital downloads.
Bingo. The only reason there's no BR on any Macs to date is because that's the way SJ wants it.
Apple has never been about building high-performance machines.
The battery life of these MBPs is astounding. For a lot of people, that is all that matters.
Raw computing power is a very small market. Most folks just want a nice looking, light machine that lasts a long time while doing word processing at the coffee shop.
I'm assuming you're joking, but the 15" internal is 1440 x 900, or now optionally 1680 x 1050. Neither are Full-HD (1920 x 1080). My MacBook Pro OUTPUTS 1920 x 1080 and beyond. My external monitor 1920 x 1200.
I used to plug my Mac into my TV movies, but simply buying a dedicated Blu-ray player is less hassle and works so much better. Now I can control my TV, Blu-ray player AND my Mac with my iPad!
The new graphics on the 13" MacBook look to be three times faster than the old 9400M.
The "GeForce 320M" appears to be based upon the GT315 desktop product line because it has 48 processing cores, rather than the desktop GT320 product which has 72 processing cores.
More interestingly, it is integrated. What this means is that NVIDIA have created a new, previously unheralded, chipset to replace the 9400M (and no, this isn't Ion 2 under a different name) with three times as much graphics capability. The 9400M could do 54 GFLOPS of computation, this new chipset could do over 150 GFLOPS depending on operating clock.
The "GeForce 330M" does appear to be based upon the desktop GT330 or even the GT340. I suspect it has 96 processing cores and can do around 300 GFLOPS of computation.
The Core 2 Duos in the 13" MacBook are a let down compared to getting Core i3s or lower-end Core i5s.
There has been too long of a delay in updating the MacBook line - 10 months is a long time in the Intel PC world.
He's full of it. Why is it not a "bag of hurt" for any other manufacturers? The ONLY reason they don't offer it is because they don't want anything to compete with their "HD Lite" digital downloads.
Yeah, you're right. Maybe Jobs' Disney connection has some bearing on it, too.
I've never used the iTunes video streaming or whatever. Netflix Blu-ray for me.
While I don't really care about Blu-ray in my MBP, there really should be a Blu-ray option, like the anti-glare screen, for those who want it and are willing to spend the extra dough.
I'm actually quite disappointed the 13" MBP didn't get an i3 or i5 cpu. I really would like to replace my nearly 4 year old MBP with a new machine but this isn't enough of an upgrade for me to pry open my wallet.
Apple is making it easy for me to behave in a financially prudent manner in this difficult economic times.
I hear that! I want to stay with a 13", but I don't want to upgrade from a four year old core 2 to a core 2 duo. The core 2 duos are yesterday's technology. \
Comments
No i7 13" MacBook Pro. Bummer!
No i7?
No way Apple would have put an i7 in there. A i5 would have been very doubtful.
I thought maybe an i3.
Apple really isn't a professional minded company anymore. Its for lifestyle consumers with money to burn.
Right.
Easy to use, looks good, lightweight, long battery life.
Those are the important aspects, with geeky performance fantasies taking a back seat.
Sure. It's still integrated Intel graphics which used to be and still is crap. nVidia 9400M was much better than Intel (good if you had one of the nVidia-only models), but still away off compared to discrete graphics.
But why should you care? If Intel is too slow, the discrete nVidia graphics kicks in, so so will never be slowed down by the Intel graphics.
Yeah, I'm not getting people's complaints with the Intel IGP with Nvidia GPU as the powerhouse.
Jobs mentioned the licensing fees were a "bag of hurt".
He's full of it. Why is it not a "bag of hurt" for any other manufacturers? The ONLY reason they don't offer it is because they don't want anything to compete with their "HD Lite" digital downloads.
Unless the internal monitor, in my case a 15", doesn't support it, then what's the point?
Does the monitor support 1080p?
So glad the new MBP is finally here.
Base line 15 + High Res
Yep. Solid upgrades. A few quibbles, but no deal-breakers.
The higher res screen on the 15-incher is good. No anti-glare option for the 1440 x 900, bummer.
i was really hoping for quad-core, now that Vectorworks 2010 finally supports multi-core processors.
No ExpressCard/32 slot, that's not very "Pro"... oh well. It's nice for adding extra FireWire ports. I'll just bundle my cards with my current MBP when I put it up on craigslist.
I wish someone made a FireWire multi-memory-card reader. At least I have a FireWire CompactFlash reader.
Released within a day of each other:
The 2.53 GHz, 17-inch MacBook Pro $2,299
Adobe Creative Suite 5 Master Collection $2,599
Just sayin'.
You mean:
2.53 GHz, 17-inch MacBook Pro $2,299
Adobe Creative Suite 5 Master Collection 2,599 kbps
No i7?
No way Apple would have put an i7 in there. A i5 would have been very doubtful.
I thought maybe an i3.
So the question now is, when the inevitable change to Core-i happens, will they just stick with the Intel IGP despite being less powerful though more power efficient or go with a discrete GPU for switched graphics, even though that would probably up the price a bit?
He's full of it. Why is it not a "bag of hurt" for any other manufacturers? The ONLY reason they don't offer it is because they don't want anything to compete with their "HD Lite" digital downloads.
Bingo. The only reason there's no BR on any Macs to date is because that's the way SJ wants it.
No ... pixie dust...
There is always pixie dust, they just don't mention it in the specs.
Exactly..... let me pre-empt the whiners: No Blu Ray, matte, touch screen, USB3, pixie dust, 20-hour battery, user-removable battery..... moan moan.......
Get on with it, folks!
So because you don't want these things, no one else should have them? And if you do you are a whiner? How intolerant of you.
Apple has never been about building high-performance machines.
The battery life of these MBPs is astounding. For a lot of people, that is all that matters.
Raw computing power is a very small market. Most folks just want a nice looking, light machine that lasts a long time while doing word processing at the coffee shop.
Then they can get a MacBook (not Pro).
Does the monitor support 1080p?
I'm assuming you're joking, but the 15" internal is 1440 x 900, or now optionally 1680 x 1050. Neither are Full-HD (1920 x 1080). My MacBook Pro OUTPUTS 1920 x 1080 and beyond. My external monitor 1920 x 1200.
I used to plug my Mac into my TV movies, but simply buying a dedicated Blu-ray player is less hassle and works so much better. Now I can control my TV, Blu-ray player AND my Mac with my iPad!
There is always pixie dust, they just don't mention it in the specs.
Plus it's gently washed with unicorn tears!
The "GeForce 320M" appears to be based upon the GT315 desktop product line because it has 48 processing cores, rather than the desktop GT320 product which has 72 processing cores.
More interestingly, it is integrated. What this means is that NVIDIA have created a new, previously unheralded, chipset to replace the 9400M (and no, this isn't Ion 2 under a different name) with three times as much graphics capability. The 9400M could do 54 GFLOPS of computation, this new chipset could do over 150 GFLOPS depending on operating clock.
The "GeForce 330M" does appear to be based upon the desktop GT330 or even the GT340. I suspect it has 96 processing cores and can do around 300 GFLOPS of computation.
The Core 2 Duos in the 13" MacBook are a let down compared to getting Core i3s or lower-end Core i5s.
There has been too long of a delay in updating the MacBook line - 10 months is a long time in the Intel PC world.
no 1080p. No esata.
complaining is not conversation.
He's full of it. Why is it not a "bag of hurt" for any other manufacturers? The ONLY reason they don't offer it is because they don't want anything to compete with their "HD Lite" digital downloads.
Yeah, you're right. Maybe Jobs' Disney connection has some bearing on it, too.
I've never used the iTunes video streaming or whatever. Netflix Blu-ray for me.
While I don't really care about Blu-ray in my MBP, there really should be a Blu-ray option, like the anti-glare screen, for those who want it and are willing to spend the extra dough.
For Blu-ray? How about $500 for it.
I'm actually quite disappointed the 13" MBP didn't get an i3 or i5 cpu. I really would like to replace my nearly 4 year old MBP with a new machine but this isn't enough of an upgrade for me to pry open my wallet.
Apple is making it easy for me to behave in a financially prudent manner in this difficult economic times.
I hear that! I want to stay with a 13", but I don't want to upgrade from a four year old core 2 to a core 2 duo. The core 2 duos are yesterday's technology.
I do, however, like the MBP's