Would that signal Blu-ray finally, like the rest of the free world?
why would you want 16:9.... unless you bought a laptop (instead of a portable dvd player/tv) to watch DVD's on... seriously... Lenovo moving away from 16:10 (recently) has made me decided to probably move to apple (unless i find 5-6k laying around, for a WDS 17') due to the 16:10 screen aspect.
no one care about dvd's.... get a burner/reader and a portable HDD.
only copy DVD once and don't distribute online/give digital copy to friends.
as far as i know you have broken 0 laws (in the US)
A move to Sandy Bridge processors is obvious, but what I really want is to see Apple make optical drives external only. However, I'm pessimistic about the prospects for such progress to come so soon because I expect Apple will make the MacBook optical-free before they make the MBP optical-free.
I'd additionally like to see Apple drop the internal HDDs and switch to SSD-only configurations, but then the MBPs would be larger MBAs. I realize some people need 1TB HDDs in their MBPs. What I really want is a 15" MBA.
".....However, next year's Macs are generally expected to utilize Intel's Sandy Bridge processors. Intel reportedly plans to formally unveil the new processors at the Consumer Electronics Show on Jan. 5th, 2011."
Ah, yes... a 4 core 15" MBP with 8 GB RAM and a big, fat solid state drive... a fine upgrade path to replace the aging 2.66 GHz MacPro at work; I can use the extra room in the cube. Just waitin'...
I just want two firewire ports for recording with no flakey cardbus or whatever.
erm that "retina" thingy on the iphone has close to 300ppi, to get that on a MBP 15" you'd need WQUXGA - no did't make that up :^D - which is 3840x2400 =0
Think how much would it cost, don't even know if they make them at all, then think about the battery drain and the graphic power required to drive it.
And as others said you don't even need 300dpi if you look at the screen from 15+ inches.
Besides, on OS X text gets tiny very fast upping the resolution on a laptop screen, unless 10.7 has a resolution independent UI you won't see any more than 1080p at max on a 15".
Now, IPS would be sweeeet instead.
Not see that happening anyway, people is ok with 6bit TN and no manufacturer offer any better, why bother to increase the BOM?
It doesn't have close to 300ppi, it has 326ppi. Note: Dots Per Inch are for Printing Devices and Pixels Per Inch for Bitmap screens.
naah... i'm still happy with my black macbook but it is time now to upgrade hence i threw some of my requirements... i'm not sure what apple will be bringing in next update so i put some of my idea... ssd's are going to be basics atleast in macbook pro's...
That's pretty unrealistic. Apple is pushing current battery tech to its limits.
very true but i still think they are trying to find to increase battery a bit more than what we have today in MBP's which is 10 hours.
>>8GB or 16GB RAM (4gb will also be sufficient)
16GB is a lot of RAM, especially for a laptop, more so for a 13" one.
actually 4gb is sufficient which i already said.
>>LightPeak
Probably the next round of updates. The industry isn't ready yet.
you are right.
>>either BLUE-RAY or NO OPTICAL DRIVE
No optical drive is far more likely.
if they can't add blu-ray i hope they will take out the optical drive. MBA is very good but specs can't meet of MBP's...
>>1080p full HD
Not on a 13 inch screen, but even if it was, you wouldn't notice the difference unless you used your laptop inches from your face.
i agree with you.
>>HDMI OUTPUT
Already has it. (adapter)
i'm not sure wether it supports full HD 1080?
>>IPS LCD Retina display screen
A Retina display would be less useful, and far more expensive, (I think screen costs increase geometrically with size...) than on the iPhone, due to the fact that you rarely hold a laptop a few inches from your face.
>>(i can dream, right?)
Just like your entire post?
hehe. even if 2 things become true from my requirements i'll be very happy and it will be like my dream come true.
The first day of summer in 2011 is June 22, which would fit within the first half of 2011 timeframe from Digitimes' most recent report.
Intel reportedly plans to formally unveil the new processors at the Consumer Electronics Show on Jan. 5th, 2011.
Which is why the suggestion of June 22 doesn't make any sense. Why would Apple wait 5 months to use the chips? Ivy Bridge will be coming just a few months later.
In January, it will be 9 months since the last update and the longest update between any MBP refresh in the last 8 years was 10 months. There's no reason for them to make this one 14 months.
Apple also don't usually release Mac hardware at WWDC any more, it's just been iPhone stuff. Why would they launch new MBPs, iMacs and the iPhone 5 together?
I think new MBPs will arrive January or February.
Jan-Feb: MB, MBP
Mar-Apr: iPad 2
May-Jun: iMac, Mini
Jun-Jul: iPhone 5
Jul-Aug: Mac Pro
Aug-Jan: Ivy Bridge but may not launch until Jan 2012
Would that signal Blu-ray finally, like the rest of the free world?
No because 16:9 is an appalling ratio for a work machine, or a game machine for that matter - how many PC games do you know that are designed in full wide screen.
Blu Ray is for home entertainment systems, not computers. Why be stuck with 1080 when you can skip the physical media and go straight to 4096?
Light peak seems to be ready. I see no reason for Apple to further delay its adoption, except of course if the chips are not yet fully functional. Since the connector seems to be minute, and the removal of the optical drive likely, we could expect the next generation to have both USB 3 for legacy peripherals AND Light peak for future high bandwidth ones.
On the software side, I expect also Lion to be the first MacOS release to be built exclusively with Clang/LLVM compiler, and that would mean*? if the published figures are correct*? a good boost to the overall performance even with no processor upgrade, LLVM being quite more efficient than GCC (especially an old release like 4.2, the last one officially useable by Apple software teams) at generating optimized code.
Apple wasn't going to update Macs and just sell iPods from now on?
Before you can take the candy away from the baby, the baby must first be given candy. This is all part of Apple's evil master plan to make Mac users cry.
"a new panel size and a price point for the mainstream market,"
this is a curious phrase. It kind of sounds like the new panel size and the new price point would be features of a single new computer, but that's not necessarily the case. There could be a new panel size (24") and a new price point, but the new price point might apply to the old 21.5" iMac. If that's the scenario, then my guess is that the lowest price would be $999 on the 21.5" iMac .
Another possibility, of course, is that the new panel and new price point are both referring to the same computer. In that case, we must be talking about a 17" iMac. Maybe I'm just so much richer than all of the little people out there, but a 17" iMac seems very unappealing to me, no matter how cheap it is (once you go 27", you never go back). So if there is a 17" iMac, it's not aimed at the usual Mac consumer. Instead, I would guess it's aimed primarily at the cash-starved education market, or perhaps the enterprise. My guess is that the price point for this machine would be noticeably less than $999.... maybe $799.
The two issues have nothing to do with one another. Apple breaks even on iTunes. That is why you don't see a whole bunch of successful contenders. iTunes is designed to sell Macs, iPods, iPhones, ect. That is where the profit is made. Apple is not supporting Blue Ray because it's licensing terms stink. To add Blueray Mac OSX would take a significant performance hit as Apple would have to lock the OS down in performance draining DRM. If you want Blue Ray get a third party player. Do a Google search there are several great articles documenting Windows performance woes in relation to BlueRay.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
Nope.
Apple has made their stance. They are unlikely to jump into the whole blu- ray thing at this point. Not after all the work to develop the iTunes store
Now what they might do, and could already be doing, is work on new codecs that would allow for true blu-ray video and audio quality with out a major increase in file size. They might also be working on improving the whole extras package and encouraging studios to make extras and have them match the physical disk packages. Perhaps even to the point of trying to replicate some of the more sophisticated options in the near future
No because 16:9 is an appalling ratio for a work machine, or a game machine for that matter - how many PC games do you know that are designed in full wide screen.
All of them? Those that are ported from console games definitely support it, and many other games have resolution independence anyway.
$999 is a good baseline price point, in which case, (re)introducing a 20" iMac would make a lot of sense. Then customers would have a decent selection when they walk into an Apple Store with $1000: ultraportable (MBA), consumer portable (MB), and consumer desktop (iMac). (yes, in my idealized world, there's no sales tax.. )
<WISH>
• Apple would do well to sell a $299 17" display to go with the Mac mini. That would allow customers to buy a complete mini-based system for $1000 as well.
• A Mac ("semi")Pro model—half the size of the Mac Pro models, but with a couple internal drive bays, a couple PCI slots, and no optical drive (who uses optical anymore?? ) Give it a base price of $1199. There are a lot of users out there who need expansion capabilities, but can't justify the leap to the Mac Pro: $1199 for the base iMac to $2499 for the base Mac Pro is a pretty big price jump. In fact, it's even bigger, because you still need to buy a display for the Mac Pro; another $999 (if you are a true Apple loyalist!).
Before you can take the candy away from the baby, the baby must first be given candy. This is all part of Apple's evil master plan to make Mac users cry.
Comments
i've been waiting for this so eagerly... i need 13" macbook pro with:
i5 2540m or i5 2520m sandy bridge
ssd 256 or 512 gb hard drive
13-15 hours battery
8GB or 16GB RAM (4gb will also be sufficient)
LightPeakhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightpeak (hope it is finally here)
either BLUE-RAY or NO OPTICAL DRIVE
1080p full HDD
HDMI OUTPUT
IPS LCD Retina display screen (i can dream, right?)
Zero of these will happen. You need to buy a PC.
I hope they bring back the 24" iMac, that is the sweet spot.
Have to agree 24" would be nice.
New panel size?
16:9 perhaps?
Would that signal Blu-ray finally, like the rest of the free world?
why would you want 16:9.... unless you bought a laptop (instead of a portable dvd player/tv) to watch DVD's on... seriously... Lenovo moving away from 16:10 (recently) has made me decided to probably move to apple (unless i find 5-6k laying around, for a WDS 17') due to the 16:10 screen aspect.
no one care about dvd's.... get a burner/reader and a portable HDD.
only copy DVD once and don't distribute online/give digital copy to friends.
as far as i know you have broken 0 laws (in the US)
I'd additionally like to see Apple drop the internal HDDs and switch to SSD-only configurations, but then the MBPs would be larger MBAs. I realize some people need 1TB HDDs in their MBPs. What I really want is a 15" MBA.
".....However, next year's Macs are generally expected to utilize Intel's Sandy Bridge processors. Intel reportedly plans to formally unveil the new processors at the Consumer Electronics Show on Jan. 5th, 2011."
Ah, yes... a 4 core 15" MBP with 8 GB RAM and a big, fat solid state drive... a fine upgrade path to replace the aging 2.66 GHz MacPro at work; I can use the extra room in the cube. Just waitin'...
I just want two firewire ports for recording with no flakey cardbus or whatever.
erm that "retina" thingy on the iphone has close to 300ppi, to get that on a MBP 15" you'd need WQUXGA - no did't make that up :^D - which is 3840x2400 =0
Think how much would it cost, don't even know if they make them at all, then think about the battery drain and the graphic power required to drive it.
And as others said you don't even need 300dpi if you look at the screen from 15+ inches.
Besides, on OS X text gets tiny very fast upping the resolution on a laptop screen, unless 10.7 has a resolution independent UI you won't see any more than 1080p at max on a 15".
Now, IPS would be sweeeet instead.
Not see that happening anyway, people is ok with 6bit TN and no manufacturer offer any better, why bother to increase the BOM?
It doesn't have close to 300ppi, it has 326ppi. Note: Dots Per Inch are for Printing Devices and Pixels Per Inch for Bitmap screens.
Zero of these will happen. You need to buy a PC.
naah... i'm still happy with my black macbook but it is time now to upgrade hence i threw some of my requirements... i'm not sure what apple will be bringing in next update so i put some of my idea... ssd's are going to be basics atleast in macbook pro's...
Maybe..
>>ssd 256 or 512 gb hard drive
Not without paying thousands
i think 256 will be there. i'm not sure.
>>13-15 hours battery
That's pretty unrealistic. Apple is pushing current battery tech to its limits.
very true but i still think they are trying to find to increase battery a bit more than what we have today in MBP's which is 10 hours.
>>8GB or 16GB RAM (4gb will also be sufficient)
16GB is a lot of RAM, especially for a laptop, more so for a 13" one.
actually 4gb is sufficient which i already said.
>>LightPeak
Probably the next round of updates. The industry isn't ready yet.
you are right.
>>either BLUE-RAY or NO OPTICAL DRIVE
No optical drive is far more likely.
if they can't add blu-ray i hope they will take out the optical drive. MBA is very good but specs can't meet of MBP's...
>>1080p full HD
Not on a 13 inch screen, but even if it was, you wouldn't notice the difference unless you used your laptop inches from your face.
i agree with you.
>>HDMI OUTPUT
Already has it. (adapter)
i'm not sure wether it supports full HD 1080?
>>IPS LCD Retina display screen
A Retina display would be less useful, and far more expensive, (I think screen costs increase geometrically with size...) than on the iPhone, due to the fact that you rarely hold a laptop a few inches from your face.
>>(i can dream, right?)
Just like your entire post?
hehe. even if 2 things become true from my requirements i'll be very happy and it will be like my dream come true.
The first day of summer in 2011 is June 22, which would fit within the first half of 2011 timeframe from Digitimes' most recent report.
Intel reportedly plans to formally unveil the new processors at the Consumer Electronics Show on Jan. 5th, 2011.
Which is why the suggestion of June 22 doesn't make any sense. Why would Apple wait 5 months to use the chips? Ivy Bridge will be coming just a few months later.
In January, it will be 9 months since the last update and the longest update between any MBP refresh in the last 8 years was 10 months. There's no reason for them to make this one 14 months.
Apple also don't usually release Mac hardware at WWDC any more, it's just been iPhone stuff. Why would they launch new MBPs, iMacs and the iPhone 5 together?
I think new MBPs will arrive January or February.
Jan-Feb: MB, MBP
Mar-Apr: iPad 2
May-Jun: iMac, Mini
Jun-Jul: iPhone 5
Jul-Aug: Mac Pro
Aug-Jan: Ivy Bridge but may not launch until Jan 2012
Apple wasn't going to update Macs and just sell iPods from now on?
You missed the </sarcasm> tag, some people might not understand!
New panel size?
16:9 perhaps?
Would that signal Blu-ray finally, like the rest of the free world?
No because 16:9 is an appalling ratio for a work machine, or a game machine for that matter - how many PC games do you know that are designed in full wide screen.
Blu Ray is for home entertainment systems, not computers. Why be stuck with 1080 when you can skip the physical media and go straight to 4096?
On the software side, I expect also Lion to be the first MacOS release to be built exclusively with Clang/LLVM compiler, and that would mean*? if the published figures are correct*? a good boost to the overall performance even with no processor upgrade, LLVM being quite more efficient than GCC (especially an old release like 4.2, the last one officially useable by Apple software teams) at generating optimized code.
Apple wasn't going to update Macs and just sell iPods from now on?
Before you can take the candy away from the baby, the baby must first be given candy. This is all part of Apple's evil master plan to make Mac users cry.
this is a curious phrase. It kind of sounds like the new panel size and the new price point would be features of a single new computer, but that's not necessarily the case. There could be a new panel size (24") and a new price point, but the new price point might apply to the old 21.5" iMac. If that's the scenario, then my guess is that the lowest price would be $999 on the 21.5" iMac .
Another possibility, of course, is that the new panel and new price point are both referring to the same computer. In that case, we must be talking about a 17" iMac. Maybe I'm just so much richer than all of the little people out there, but a 17" iMac seems very unappealing to me, no matter how cheap it is (once you go 27", you never go back). So if there is a 17" iMac, it's not aimed at the usual Mac consumer. Instead, I would guess it's aimed primarily at the cash-starved education market, or perhaps the enterprise. My guess is that the price point for this machine would be noticeably less than $999.... maybe $799.
Nope.
Apple has made their stance. They are unlikely to jump into the whole blu- ray thing at this point. Not after all the work to develop the iTunes store
Now what they might do, and could already be doing, is work on new codecs that would allow for true blu-ray video and audio quality with out a major increase in file size. They might also be working on improving the whole extras package and encouraging studios to make extras and have them match the physical disk packages. Perhaps even to the point of trying to replicate some of the more sophisticated options in the near future
16:9 perhaps?
My iMac is already 16:9.
No because 16:9 is an appalling ratio for a work machine, or a game machine for that matter - how many PC games do you know that are designed in full wide screen.
All of them? Those that are ported from console games definitely support it, and many other games have resolution independence anyway.
<WISH>
• Apple would do well to sell a $299 17" display to go with the Mac mini. That would allow customers to buy a complete mini-based system for $1000 as well.
• A Mac ("semi")Pro model—half the size of the Mac Pro models, but with a couple internal drive bays, a couple PCI slots, and no optical drive (who uses optical anymore??
</WISH>
Before you can take the candy away from the baby, the baby must first be given candy. This is all part of Apple's evil master plan to make Mac users cry.
buahahahahaha!!