This is wrong. I just checked in the Mactracker app. The current MBP 13" were out in April-2010. So they are more than 6 months old now.
The dates really mean nothing. Apple needs the right hardware from it vendors for a viable update. On top of that if the are to drive innovation like they did on the AIRs it may simply take them longer to get it right. Plus if you are selling all you can make the drive for an incremental update isn't there.
Beyound that the 13" MBP is actually a pretty competitive machine. The competition is always a consideration.
Quote:
We're almost at mid-November and I don't expect Apple to release a new MBP during the following days, because of the new MBA hoopla (and there's absolutely no rumors about something new right now).
Well they have a few more days before the craziness sets in. Since the rumor mill is dead quiet I suspect nothing is coming this year. I disagree though that this has anything at all to do with the AIR debut.
The other factor is the simple question of what would go into the new MBP. That actually should be plural as in Pros because the likelyhood is that all three would get updated at the same time.
Quote:
Since Apple never released a new Mac in December, maybe we'll see something new in January ? On 2011 Feb 1, the current MBP 13" will be more than 9 months old.
Yeah most likely early next year after or around the time of Intel announcements related to the mobile space. Sadly I don't believe AMD will have anything suitable for these machines. This is actually material for another thread but Intels lock on mobile processors is really hurting the market and Apple.
Quote:
What is the average time between MBP refreshes ?
Doesn't really matter!
If you buy when you really need the machine you will always be happy. Otherwise wait until a new release. Trying to game the system will lead to resentmentbecause you really aren't in control.
Quote:
EDIT : According to the Mactracker application, the previous MBP 13" were out in June-2009. So about 10 months before the 2010 MBP 13".
The 2008 MBP 13" were out in Oct-2008, so 8 months before the 2009 MBP 13".
So a new MBP 13" in Feb-2011 ?
Lets hope so. Apple will likely go with the new models when all the Pros can be updated.
I think that I finally made my decision : Tomorrow (Friday), I'll go to the Apple Store and buy the basic 13" MBP and order it with the 128 GB SSD.
I'm just too tired to wait for a refresh, and I don't want to become another "beta tester" for a whole new product generation in february (the very approximate expected date for a MBP refresh).
I think that I finally made my decision : Tomorrow (Friday), I'll go to the Apple Store and buy the basic 13" MBP and order it with the 128 GB SSD.
You could save a lot of money by not buying that SSD from Apple. Apple wants $350, about $100 more than the going rate for 128GB. Installing a drive yourself in the unibody Macbooks is really easy.
You could save a lot of money by not buying that SSD from Apple. Apple wants $350, about $100 more than the going rate for 128GB. Installing a drive yourself in the unibody Macbooks is really easy.
Plus then you have that standard HDD in ADDITION to the SSD. Use it as an external.
Okay! I FINALLY got a new MacBook Pro 13" at 2.66 GHz, with its default 320 GB HD (I'm typing this message on it right now). I couldn't wait anymore.
I'll upgrade the HD to SSD much later in 2011 (or 2012?), when prices are down enough so I can buy a 256 GB SSD. 128 GB is too tight for me.
I'm new to the portable world. I hope that this MBP will be okay for all my needs...
You have a nice machine there!
I agree with you 128GB is a little tight for today's computing needs. So holding off till prices come down is a good thing. If prices come down. There are factors at work that might stop the cycle of price reductions.
As to being good for your needs; I've found that after a couple of years I out grow the machine. I'm hoping for the day when a Mac doesn't feel hopelessly slow after a couple of years ownership.
I agree with you 128GB is a little tight for today's computing needs. So holding off till prices come down is a good thing. If prices come down. There are factors at work that might stop the cycle of price reductions.
Like profiteering. There's a rumour suggesting that might be the case for some:
"our information on the price difference per GB being under 5% (in favour of the 25nm models)"
So they fit twice the amount in for the same price and charge the consumer 5% less. Hopefully the competition soon sorts that out but it seems Intel won't.
Prices are said to start at $359 for 160GB. The 600GB is $1197. Right now, the 160GB costs $389 so that's only a drop of 7%.
There's still Crucial, Kingston, Corsair etc but we'll see if they do anything interesting. I really hope that's not the case because if a fab shrink that doubles capacity doesn't drop the prices on these things, it's going to take ages for them to take over HDD.
If the price only drops 5%, there surely has to be some regulations preventing this. With computer chips when they do this, the performance goes up or has extra features. These SSDs will be the same speed in most cases except Intel so having close to the same price per GB is not justified.
Comments
This is wrong. I just checked in the Mactracker app. The current MBP 13" were out in April-2010. So they are more than 6 months old now.
The dates really mean nothing. Apple needs the right hardware from it vendors for a viable update. On top of that if the are to drive innovation like they did on the AIRs it may simply take them longer to get it right. Plus if you are selling all you can make the drive for an incremental update isn't there.
Beyound that the 13" MBP is actually a pretty competitive machine. The competition is always a consideration.
We're almost at mid-November and I don't expect Apple to release a new MBP during the following days, because of the new MBA hoopla (and there's absolutely no rumors about something new right now).
Well they have a few more days before the craziness sets in. Since the rumor mill is dead quiet I suspect nothing is coming this year. I disagree though that this has anything at all to do with the AIR debut.
The other factor is the simple question of what would go into the new MBP. That actually should be plural as in Pros because the likelyhood is that all three would get updated at the same time.
Since Apple never released a new Mac in December, maybe we'll see something new in January ? On 2011 Feb 1, the current MBP 13" will be more than 9 months old.
Yeah most likely early next year after or around the time of Intel announcements related to the mobile space. Sadly I don't believe AMD will have anything suitable for these machines. This is actually material for another thread but Intels lock on mobile processors is really hurting the market and Apple.
What is the average time between MBP refreshes ?
Doesn't really matter!
If you buy when you really need the machine you will always be happy. Otherwise wait until a new release. Trying to game the system will lead to resentmentbecause you really aren't in control.
EDIT : According to the Mactracker application, the previous MBP 13" were out in June-2009. So about 10 months before the 2010 MBP 13".
The 2008 MBP 13" were out in Oct-2008, so 8 months before the 2009 MBP 13".
So a new MBP 13" in Feb-2011 ?
Lets hope so. Apple will likely go with the new models when all the Pros can be updated.
I'm just too tired to wait for a refresh, and I don't want to become another "beta tester" for a whole new product generation in february (the very approximate expected date for a MBP refresh).
I think that I finally made my decision : Tomorrow (Friday), I'll go to the Apple Store and buy the basic 13" MBP and order it with the 128 GB SSD.
You could save a lot of money by not buying that SSD from Apple. Apple wants $350, about $100 more than the going rate for 128GB. Installing a drive yourself in the unibody Macbooks is really easy.
You could save a lot of money by not buying that SSD from Apple. Apple wants $350, about $100 more than the going rate for 128GB. Installing a drive yourself in the unibody Macbooks is really easy.
Plus then you have that standard HDD in ADDITION to the SSD. Use it as an external.
Plus then you have that standard HDD in ADDITION to the SSD. Use it as an external.
Okay! I FINALLY got a new MacBook Pro 13" at 2.66 GHz, with its default 320 GB HD (I'm typing this message on it right now). I couldn't wait anymore.
I'll upgrade the HD to SSD much later in 2011 (or 2012?), when prices are down enough so I can buy a 256 GB SSD. 128 GB is too tight for me.
I'm new to the portable world. I hope that this MBP will be okay for all my needs...
Okay! I FINALLY got a new MacBook Pro 13" at 2.66 GHz, with its default 320 GB HD (I'm typing this message on it right now). I couldn't wait anymore.
I'll upgrade the HD to SSD much later in 2011 (or 2012?), when prices are down enough so I can buy a 256 GB SSD. 128 GB is too tight for me.
I'm new to the portable world. I hope that this MBP will be okay for all my needs...
You have a nice machine there!
I agree with you 128GB is a little tight for today's computing needs. So holding off till prices come down is a good thing. If prices come down. There are factors at work that might stop the cycle of price reductions.
As to being good for your needs; I've found that after a couple of years I out grow the machine. I'm hoping for the day when a Mac doesn't feel hopelessly slow after a couple of years ownership.
I agree with you 128GB is a little tight for today's computing needs. So holding off till prices come down is a good thing. If prices come down. There are factors at work that might stop the cycle of price reductions.
Like profiteering. There's a rumour suggesting that might be the case for some:
http://www.behardware.com/news/11200...-from-ocz.html
"our information on the price difference per GB being under 5% (in favour of the 25nm models)"
So they fit twice the amount in for the same price and charge the consumer 5% less. Hopefully the competition soon sorts that out but it seems Intel won't.
New Intel drives are in the open and benchmarked:
http://en.expreview.com/2010/10/28/i...bao/11208.html
Prices are said to start at $359 for 160GB. The 600GB is $1197. Right now, the 160GB costs $389 so that's only a drop of 7%.
There's still Crucial, Kingston, Corsair etc but we'll see if they do anything interesting. I really hope that's not the case because if a fab shrink that doubles capacity doesn't drop the prices on these things, it's going to take ages for them to take over HDD.
If the price only drops 5%, there surely has to be some regulations preventing this. With computer chips when they do this, the performance goes up or has extra features. These SSDs will be the same speed in most cases except Intel so having close to the same price per GB is not justified.