Hoping the same genius who redesign FCP-X will not be in charge of "redesigning" the "new" MacBook Pro.
Quote:
Ideally, Apple should allow for two additional drives to be installed in the MacBook Pro, which could be raided for speed and capacity, for a total of 3 hard drives. That would be a "pro" machine.
Hoping the same genius who redesign FCP-X will not be in charge of "redesigning" the "new" MacBook Pro.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the software engineers who wrote FCPX are not also hardware engineers working on the MBP.
Quote:
Getting rid of the optical drive is fine, provided a second hard drive can be put into the "new" MacBook Pros.
I can see Apple keeping the 2.5" drive for now while adding the SSD blade but I can't see Apple adding 2xHDDs.
I don't get why removing the ODD means that it should be replaced by an extra HDD.
Quote:
Ideally, Apple should allow for two additional drives to be installed in the MacBook Pro, which could be raided for speed and capacity, for a total of 3 hard drives. That would be a "pro" machine.
That would certainly be pro but perhaps so pro that it's no longer a consumer notebook but a speciality niche product. Consider that only of Apple's Macs have multiple HDDs: the Mac Pro. Even the iMac only has an option for a 3.5" HDD and 2.5" SSD.
You're setting yourself for disappointment if you envision anything more than an SSD blade and a 2.5" HDD/SSD and even then that still seems less than certain.
Quote:
Listening, Apple Genius? Or are you just a Phone company?
Apple's Macs lead the industry so much that they can't help but follow what Apple does.
I didn't include the Mac mini because the two drives are only for Mac OS X Server. If you are using a MBP for a server you are using it well outside a common usage scenario.
1) So you think the MBP will go away or thy they will keep trucking on without any case redesign?
2) You failed to notice how making the MBP thinner doesn't mean it will have any less space for cooling the CPU and GPU, or how removing the ODD allows for a great deal more freedom for placing components that need more heat dissipation.
3) I'll ask again: What did the MBP lose the last time it followed the MBA into the future? I think it became the beat pro notebook Apple had ever created.
I'm trying to determine where the MBP followed the Air. The MBP actually adopted the unibody design first. At this point I'm going to wait it out and see what they release. Thinner wouldn't really surprise me, but I don't expect to see it in the same thickness as the Air. The Air is still stuck with ULV cpus without the ODD. Given how hot it can run when really pushed, I'd imagine it's a combination of thermal factors and battery life that led them to choose this cpu line.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz
@ Generic Apple can't make it slim without making it slower and more expensive! Comments
What? How do you arm chair engineers have any clue what Apple is not capable of doing? Have you tried making your own 15" MacBook AirPro at home and it just didn't work out??
Know-it-alls, please STFU.
The rage is unneeded. It's easy to respond with something well thought out rather than trolling here. Apple does sometimes forego many things in their designs in favor of aesthetics. When you buy from Apple, you often conform to their offerings to a greater degree than might be necessary with other companies, and that is annoying. Now regarding what they can/cannot design look at the macbook air. They went with the ulv cpus there and it lacks an ODD. If they went with a similar density at 15", do you think that allows enough room for discrete graphics and a quad cpu comparable to current offerings? Something will take a step backward for a generation or more in this scenario whether it's power, battery life, port allocation, display quality, etc. In the case of Apple they try to push such a product anyway with gimped settings like the original macbook air (with its throttled cpu settings) if the following generation of hardware would fix enough of these problems. Then it becomes almost a beta test as they can look for bugs before the intended hardware generation even arrives. It's unrealistic to think that Apple operates without any design limitations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I'd also like to see IPS finally come into the MBPs. People have been complaining about this for as long as IPS has been out but it's only recently that it's even become a viable option for a notebook.
Display panels are a weird thing. IPS caught on with desktop displays first where critical needs had to be met in terms of display quality. Many companies stockpiled extra crts for years. The combination of late era crts having been constructed with inferior quality to cut costs and loads of R&D in ips displays pushed many of the holdouts to lcd displays around 2006 to 2007. I saw many many many Sony Artisans still in use before that, as companies had stockpiled such models. It was a combination of aging hardware, EOL software, and improvements to lcd displays to a point where banding was becoming less of an issue that did this. IPS has stagnated somewhat. Many of the current ones use wider gamuts which aren't as useful as they might seem on paper. We're seeing IPS used in phones and tablets where volume is huge and components like cpus are extremely cheap. I'm not certain that it's within budget for the macbook line given the cost effectiveness of the TN panels. Beyond that just sticking in a panel doesn't necessarily grant you supreme quality. Lcd displays often have quite a lot of engineering added to obtain the desired response curve, stability (in terms of drift) and uniformity. It costs money. We'll see if Apple chooses to make this an option anyway.
I'm trying to determine where the MBP followed the Air. The MBP actually adopted the unibody design first.
It was the MBA that had it first.
MBA ? January 2008
Aluminium MB & 15" MBP *October 2008
17" MBP ? February 2009
Quote:
At this point I'm going to wait it out and see what they release. Thinner wouldn't really surprise me, but I don't expect to see it in the same thickness as the Air. The Air is still stuck with ULV cpus without the ODD. Given how hot it can run when really pushed, I'd imagine it's a combination of thermal factors and battery life that led them to choose this cpu line.
I certainly never said it would be as thin or thinner than the MBA. In fact I stated the bottom chassis could even be about the same thickness as the current MBPs yet with the...
reduction of the top chassis thickness from being milled (something the MBA still only has)
the removal of the ODD which will allow better placement of the components and cooling (because they can be put in a row along the back vent instead of forced into an odd squarish design)
...they will be able to do a lot more with the same space. That ODD takes up an estimated 18"^3. That's not quite the battery size but it's not too far off. You should be able to taper the design so that you can have as much or more battery while having a thinner overall notebook.
For some reason that seems to suggest that they will have to use CULV processors, remove the dGPU, and forego what makes the MBP a Pro machine, yet I recall no one saying these unibody MBPs were less powerful or more MBA-like by adopting the unibody chassis and thinning out the notebook from 1" to 0.95".
I certainly never said it would be as thin or thinner than the MBA. In fact I stated the bottom chassis could even be about the same thickness as the current MBPs yet with the...
reduction of the top chassis thickness from being milled (something the MBA still only has)
the removal of the ODD which will allow better placement of the components and cooling (because they can be put in a row along the back vent instead of forced into an odd squarish design)
Hehe.. I wasn't arguing with you on that, but I thought they introduced the milled enclosure with the second generation Air. I'm still not sure what will/won't be included here. Bleh beyond that Apple has disappointed me immensely on the driver / OSX end lately.
I thought they introduced the milled enclosure with the second generation Air.
Apple claims to have to learned from designing the original MacBook Air that inspired them to make the MacBook Pro out of the same aluminum unibody enclosure method.
Not only the price is now more attractive, but the first MBAs had lame performance. They were going to sell anyway to a lot of high visibility sales executives. But the MBA has seen dramatic increases in performance with the last two (I'd say: STEALTH) iterations. And yet, they're selling like hotcakes.
They didn't even sell to high visibility sales executives. They were a flop, pure and simple. Apple misjudged what they could release and charge for. The improved performance in the revised models brought them into usefulness, and sales responded, and now that they spec out as they do they sell well.
One of Apple's greatest attributes (and I say this as an Apple fan not basher) is their ability to make people have amnesia about when they screwed up so they can proceed past the bump.
I said this when I got my MBA a year ago, and I repeat it now. Please forget the MBP form factor. It has no future, because nobody wants to buy a new laptop with that form factor. If you want that, buy a PC.
The future is the challenge of putting the performance of the MBP in the MBA form factor. If you don't understand that, the future isn't for you, sorry.
Once you've used an MBA, you no longer want the MBP form factor, and all you say is "I want my MBP performance on the MBA form factor".
That's what the customers want, and that's also what Apple wishes to achieve. A quite promising future.
I wish to add that I believe the current MBP line are great machines, and all MBP owners have a superb machine that will last for years. So, don't take me wrong, I love current MBPs. I'm only saying that future MBPs will move to a lighter and lighter form factor. Technology has always evolved in that direction. The performance of an iPad required the size of a deskside supercomputer just a few decades ago, and now we've that same performance on one hand. The same goes for future MBPs, no matter how great is the current MBP line.
Glad i picked up my MBP when i did. They should be loading these babies up with more instead of stripping them down. After all the do have the "Pro" monicker on them, whatever.
Glad i picked up my MBP when i did. They should be loading these babies up with more instead of stripping them down. After all the do have the "Pro" monicker on them, whatever.
So a second optical drive is the way to go in a notebook?
I said this when I got my MBA a year ago, and I repeat it now. Please forget the MBP form factor. It has no future, because nobody wants to buy a new laptop with that form factor. If you want that, buy a PC.
The future is the challenge of putting the performance of the MBP in the MBA form factor. If you don't understand that, the future isn't for you, sorry.
Once you've used an MBA, you no longer want the MBP form factor, and all you say is "I want my MBP performance on the MBA form factor".
That's what the customers want, and that's also what Apple wishes to achieve. A quite promising future.
If it didn't involve giving something up, other oems would have transitioned to a thinned out enclosure long ago. The same goes for Apple. It's not lossless. It's just that if enough people like them, it will influence intel's R&D. Apple and everyone on here should get over the ultrabook thing, as it may provide Apple with superior cpus for their machines. I'm sure I'll get more ARM trolling from people who have never bothered to read a single white paper.
It's not so much the challenge of getting the next generation of the same thing into the machine. If they want identical dimensions, you're limited to what will run within it. Personally I've used both, and I'd choose the one that performs better every time. Some of you drastically overstate the advantages here. You're likely to see either a 15" Air or a hybrid design assuming the validity of these rumors.
Get ready for the Thunderbolt Nvidia external dual SLI graphics card... Oh, wait. Apple only caters to the promarket, people who never need real graphics and only run Microsoft Excel on their Windows Macs. They don't do games, Photoshop or Maya... Everything is fine then.
Nice try, but HP's Macbook clones (the Envy 15 and 17) allow for mSATA SSDs in addition to optical drives, and multiple HDs in a package roughly the same size as the current Macbook Pros. You don't have to go to a 15lb, 4" behemoth with thirty minutes of battery life to get those features.
Nice try, but HP's Macbook clones (the Envy 15 and 17) allow for mSATA SSDs in addition to optical drives, and multiple HDs in a package roughly the same size as the current Macbook Pros. You don't have to go to a 15lb, 4" behemoth with thirty minutes of battery life to get those features.
First of all, the 15" Envy is 16.8% thicker than the 15" MBP and the 17" Envy is 30.6% thicker than the 17" MBP.
Secondly, it's silly to suggest that "mSATA SSDs" require a "15lb, 4" behemoth with thirty minutes of battery life" when it should be clear that the SSD blade will take up less space and use less power than other options.
What is the concepts of the MBP that makes it the MBP? The shape....Its not tapered like the MBA is? Or is it the dedicated graphics? The MBA does not have dedicated graphics. The optical drive? the MBA does not have an optical drive. So what is as you say the Pro-ness of the MBP? Rumor has it they will remove the optical drive. So if the do that and give it a tapered design like the MBA with no optical drive and integrated graphics what is left to give it a MBP pro-ness?
I expect that the next MacBook Pro will have most or all of these features which the MacBook Air does not have:
Comments
Hoping the same genius who redesign FCP-X will not be in charge of "redesigning" the "new" MacBook Pro.
Ideally, Apple should allow for two additional drives to be installed in the MacBook Pro, which could be raided for speed and capacity, for a total of 3 hard drives. That would be a "pro" machine.
It's also a laptop, you know. This seems to be what you want, but lo and behold?
Hoping the same genius who redesign FCP-X will not be in charge of "redesigning" the "new" MacBook Pro.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the software engineers who wrote FCPX are not also hardware engineers working on the MBP.
Getting rid of the optical drive is fine, provided a second hard drive can be put into the "new" MacBook Pros.
I can see Apple keeping the 2.5" drive for now while adding the SSD blade but I can't see Apple adding 2xHDDs.
I don't get why removing the ODD means that it should be replaced by an extra HDD.
Ideally, Apple should allow for two additional drives to be installed in the MacBook Pro, which could be raided for speed and capacity, for a total of 3 hard drives. That would be a "pro" machine.
That would certainly be pro but perhaps so pro that it's no longer a consumer notebook but a speciality niche product. Consider that only of Apple's Macs have multiple HDDs: the Mac Pro. Even the iMac only has an option for a 3.5" HDD and 2.5" SSD.
You're setting yourself for disappointment if you envision anything more than an SSD blade and a 2.5" HDD/SSD and even then that still seems less than certain.
Listening, Apple Genius? Or are you just a Phone company?
Apple's Macs lead the industry so much that they can't help but follow what Apple does.
Consider that only of Apple's Macs have multiple HDDs: the Mac Pro. Even the iMac only has an option for a 3.5" HDD and 2.5" SSD.
The Mac Mini and the iMac have? oh, I see.
The Mac Mini and the iMac have? oh, I see.
I didn't include the Mac mini because the two drives are only for Mac OS X Server. If you are using a MBP for a server you are using it well outside a common usage scenario.
1) So you think the MBP will go away or thy they will keep trucking on without any case redesign?
2) You failed to notice how making the MBP thinner doesn't mean it will have any less space for cooling the CPU and GPU, or how removing the ODD allows for a great deal more freedom for placing components that need more heat dissipation.
3) I'll ask again: What did the MBP lose the last time it followed the MBA into the future? I think it became the beat pro notebook Apple had ever created.
I'm trying to determine where the MBP followed the Air. The MBP actually adopted the unibody design first. At this point I'm going to wait it out and see what they release. Thinner wouldn't really surprise me, but I don't expect to see it in the same thickness as the Air. The Air is still stuck with ULV cpus without the ODD. Given how hot it can run when really pushed, I'd imagine it's a combination of thermal factors and battery life that led them to choose this cpu line.
@ Generic Apple can't make it slim without making it slower and more expensive! Comments
What? How do you arm chair engineers have any clue what Apple is not capable of doing? Have you tried making your own 15" MacBook AirPro at home and it just didn't work out??
Know-it-alls, please STFU.
The rage is unneeded. It's easy to respond with something well thought out rather than trolling here. Apple does sometimes forego many things in their designs in favor of aesthetics. When you buy from Apple, you often conform to their offerings to a greater degree than might be necessary with other companies, and that is annoying. Now regarding what they can/cannot design look at the macbook air. They went with the ulv cpus there and it lacks an ODD. If they went with a similar density at 15", do you think that allows enough room for discrete graphics and a quad cpu comparable to current offerings? Something will take a step backward for a generation or more in this scenario whether it's power, battery life, port allocation, display quality, etc. In the case of Apple they try to push such a product anyway with gimped settings like the original macbook air (with its throttled cpu settings) if the following generation of hardware would fix enough of these problems. Then it becomes almost a beta test as they can look for bugs before the intended hardware generation even arrives. It's unrealistic to think that Apple operates without any design limitations.
I'd also like to see IPS finally come into the MBPs. People have been complaining about this for as long as IPS has been out but it's only recently that it's even become a viable option for a notebook.
Display panels are a weird thing. IPS caught on with desktop displays first where critical needs had to be met in terms of display quality. Many companies stockpiled extra crts for years. The combination of late era crts having been constructed with inferior quality to cut costs and loads of R&D in ips displays pushed many of the holdouts to lcd displays around 2006 to 2007. I saw many many many Sony Artisans still in use before that, as companies had stockpiled such models. It was a combination of aging hardware, EOL software, and improvements to lcd displays to a point where banding was becoming less of an issue that did this. IPS has stagnated somewhat. Many of the current ones use wider gamuts which aren't as useful as they might seem on paper. We're seeing IPS used in phones and tablets where volume is huge and components like cpus are extremely cheap. I'm not certain that it's within budget for the macbook line given the cost effectiveness of the TN panels. Beyond that just sticking in a panel doesn't necessarily grant you supreme quality. Lcd displays often have quite a lot of engineering added to obtain the desired response curve, stability (in terms of drift) and uniformity. It costs money. We'll see if Apple chooses to make this an option anyway.
I'm trying to determine where the MBP followed the Air. The MBP actually adopted the unibody design first.
It was the MBA that had it first.
At this point I'm going to wait it out and see what they release. Thinner wouldn't really surprise me, but I don't expect to see it in the same thickness as the Air. The Air is still stuck with ULV cpus without the ODD. Given how hot it can run when really pushed, I'd imagine it's a combination of thermal factors and battery life that led them to choose this cpu line.
I certainly never said it would be as thin or thinner than the MBA. In fact I stated the bottom chassis could even be about the same thickness as the current MBPs yet with the...
- reduction of the top chassis thickness from being milled (something the MBA still only has)
- the removal of the ODD which will allow better placement of the components and cooling (because they can be put in a row along the back vent instead of forced into an odd squarish design)
...they will be able to do a lot more with the same space. That ODD takes up an estimated 18"^3. That's not quite the battery size but it's not too far off. You should be able to taper the design so that you can have as much or more battery while having a thinner overall notebook.For some reason that seems to suggest that they will have to use CULV processors, remove the dGPU, and forego what makes the MBP a Pro machine, yet I recall no one saying these unibody MBPs were less powerful or more MBA-like by adopting the unibody chassis and thinning out the notebook from 1" to 0.95".
It was the MBA that had it first.
- MBA ? January 2008
- Aluminium MB & 15" MBP *October 2008
- 17" MBP ? February 2009
I certainly never said it would be as thin or thinner than the MBA. In fact I stated the bottom chassis could even be about the same thickness as the current MBPs yet with the...Hehe.. I wasn't arguing with you on that, but I thought they introduced the milled enclosure with the second generation Air. I'm still not sure what will/won't be included here. Bleh beyond that Apple has disappointed me immensely on the driver / OSX end lately
I thought they introduced the milled enclosure with the second generation Air.
Apple claims to have to learned from designing the original MacBook Air that inspired them to make the MacBook Pro out of the same aluminum unibody enclosure method.
Not only the price is now more attractive, but the first MBAs had lame performance. They were going to sell anyway to a lot of high visibility sales executives. But the MBA has seen dramatic increases in performance with the last two (I'd say: STEALTH) iterations. And yet, they're selling like hotcakes.
They didn't even sell to high visibility sales executives. They were a flop, pure and simple. Apple misjudged what they could release and charge for. The improved performance in the revised models brought them into usefulness, and sales responded, and now that they spec out as they do they sell well.
One of Apple's greatest attributes (and I say this as an Apple fan not basher) is their ability to make people have amnesia about when they screwed up so they can proceed past the bump.
The future is the challenge of putting the performance of the MBP in the MBA form factor. If you don't understand that, the future isn't for you, sorry.
Once you've used an MBA, you no longer want the MBP form factor, and all you say is "I want my MBP performance on the MBA form factor".
That's what the customers want, and that's also what Apple wishes to achieve. A quite promising future.
Glad i picked up my MBP when i did. They should be loading these babies up with more instead of stripping them down. After all the do have the "Pro" monicker on them, whatever.
So a second optical drive is the way to go in a notebook?
I said this when I got my MBA a year ago, and I repeat it now. Please forget the MBP form factor. It has no future, because nobody wants to buy a new laptop with that form factor. If you want that, buy a PC.
The future is the challenge of putting the performance of the MBP in the MBA form factor. If you don't understand that, the future isn't for you, sorry.
Once you've used an MBA, you no longer want the MBP form factor, and all you say is "I want my MBP performance on the MBA form factor".
That's what the customers want, and that's also what Apple wishes to achieve. A quite promising future.
If it didn't involve giving something up, other oems would have transitioned to a thinned out enclosure long ago. The same goes for Apple. It's not lossless. It's just that if enough people like them, it will influence intel's R&D. Apple and everyone on here should get over the ultrabook thing, as it may provide Apple with superior cpus for their machines. I'm sure I'll get more ARM trolling from people who have never bothered to read a single white paper.
It's not so much the challenge of getting the next generation of the same thing into the machine. If they want identical dimensions, you're limited to what will run within it. Personally I've used both, and I'd choose the one that performs better every time. Some of you drastically overstate the advantages here. You're likely to see either a 15" Air or a hybrid design assuming the validity of these rumors.
I'm waiting for holographic displays. Avatar anyone?...
Mmm? nah, I'd rather not use a GUI based on a taco salad bowl.
It's also a laptop, you know. This seems to be what you want, but lo and behold?
Nice try, but HP's Macbook clones (the Envy 15 and 17) allow for mSATA SSDs in addition to optical drives, and multiple HDs in a package roughly the same size as the current Macbook Pros. You don't have to go to a 15lb, 4" behemoth with thirty minutes of battery life to get those features.
Nice try, but HP's Macbook clones (the Envy 15 and 17) allow for mSATA SSDs in addition to optical drives, and multiple HDs in a package roughly the same size as the current Macbook Pros. You don't have to go to a 15lb, 4" behemoth with thirty minutes of battery life to get those features.
First of all, the 15" Envy is 16.8% thicker than the 15" MBP and the 17" Envy is 30.6% thicker than the 17" MBP.
Secondly, it's silly to suggest that "mSATA SSDs" require a "15lb, 4" behemoth with thirty minutes of battery life" when it should be clear that the SSD blade will take up less space and use less power than other options.
What is the concepts of the MBP that makes it the MBP? The shape....Its not tapered like the MBA is? Or is it the dedicated graphics? The MBA does not have dedicated graphics. The optical drive? the MBA does not have an optical drive. So what is as you say the Pro-ness of the MBP? Rumor has it they will remove the optical drive. So if the do that and give it a tapered design like the MBA with no optical drive and integrated graphics what is left to give it a MBP pro-ness?
I expect that the next MacBook Pro will have most or all of these features which the MacBook Air does not have:
- 25 to 35W CPUs
- discreet graphics
- two (rather than one) SSD slots
- Ethernet port
- Full-speed Thunderbolt port
- HiDPI display
- HD webcam
- 10 hour battery
- 8GB RAM BTO option