Since when did the iBook run parallel with the mac mini?
iBook = portable iMac
MacBook Pro = portable PowerMac
Historically, it's been more like this, spec-wise:
iBook = class of its own as the weakest Mac
PowerBook = portable iMac
PowerMac = class of its own as the most powerful Mac
Apple's "pro" vs "consumer" lines have never been separated by spec, because portables have always been less powerful than desktops (excepting a brief moment back when the G3 was king). There's not enough history behind the Mini yet to say for sure "iBook = Mini", but it would make plenty of sense.
Since when did the iBook run parallel with the mac mini?
What Towel and hmurchison said. The iBook hasn't been even remotely close to the iMac's specs since the G3 era, if ever. Look at today's iMac and MacBook Pro. The MacBook Pro carries a $700-$800 premium over it's iMac equivalent. Using that same equation, a $999 iBook with the $599 Mac Mini's specs would be an absolute steal, especially considering the Mac Mini doesn't include a screen. Not that I personally feel it would be a steal, just that in comparison to Apple's other offerings it would be.
backtomac, I agree that Apple should do more to separate it's MacBook and MacBook Pro offerings, but as things stand what they're giving us for $1,999 isn't a whole lot. That's what makes this so difficult. If these iBook replacements didn't arrive until the additional 2.33Ghz Core Duo and processor price cuts show up in May, then there would be more options for Apple to use in the sub-$1,999 category. Or even better, a price-drop on the current $1,999 model to something like $1,799. As it is today, all we've got to fill a $1,000 gap is 1.5Ghz and 1.66Ghz Core Solos, a 1.67Ghz Core Duo, and a graphics card or lack-therof.
DHagan4755, because a 1" display difference doesn't seem like enough between $1,499 and $1,999.
Why a 13.3-inch widescreen at the $1499 price range? Why not a 14.1-inch widescreen?
I'm not hoping for a 13.3" widescreen specifically, but something wider and no less tall than the 12.1" 4x3 screen. Oh...and while I'm asking for stuff...I want no fewer horizontal pixels than I have on my TiBook (1280). Oh...and world peace too.
I really hope we don't have to spend $1,999 to get an Apple notebook with a dedicated graphics card. That's pretty steep, even for Apple.
When merom comes out I think chances will be better. The MBP line can move to these chips while the iBook line can take on faster core duo chips and fold in a cheap video card. That would give good separation to consumer and pro lines yet allow Apple to offer a pretty powerful entry level laptop. Again, just my 2 cents.
after reading & posting forum after forum about the upcoming macbooks i wonder if i shouldn't just buy me an 12" ibook or a powerbook right away? since what i need is the smallest form factor that apple has.. and unless they come up with a 12.1 wxga or 13.3 wxga I have no used for any other.. the 14" is already too big for me to carry around all the time..
A lot of you are failing to realize the historic spec/pricing layout of the PB's. Typically it was five models: low-end 12", high-end 12" which shared basically the same specs as the low-end 15" and some from the high-end 15", then the über high-end 17" which was basically the high-end 15" with the bigger display a few extra things [GPU, mainly].
It wasn't until recently that Apple has completely negated the PB line, especially the 12", and consolidate it into 3 models. Now that there are two 15" MBP models, I can see them going back to something similar like this scheme or atleast offering more BTO options on the smallest MBP [CPU upgrade].
Because of this, I'm not sure why anyone hasnt mentioned putting a 1.88 Core Duo in a 13.3 MBP as either a second, higher end model or as a BTO option.
[ but as things stand what they're giving us for $1,999 isn't a whole lot. [/B]
I don't mean to fight you point for point, after all were on the same team, but the MBPs are competetively priced with their comparable pc products. Read link below.
Jack is my younger brother. I taught him everything he knows.
Quote:
Originally posted by Zenga
after reading & posting forum after forum about the upcoming macbooks i wonder if i shouldn't just buy me an 12" ibook or a powerbook right away?
Please don't do that unless you're content with 1024x768 and need to run PowerPC-only apps.
Quote:
Originally posted by ryanh
Because of this, I'm not sure why anyone hasnt mentioned putting a 1.88 Core Duo in a 13.3 MBP as either a second, higher end model or as a BTO option.
Quote:
Originally posted by DHagan4755
Why doesn't Apple offer a 1.67GHz Core Duo MacBook Pro for a lower price?
Both very interesting points. In a perfect world, you could go to the online Apple Store and BTO a 13.3" with a 1.87Ghz Core Duo, or a 15.4" with a 1.67Ghz Core Duo, depending on whether you favor size or performance. I very much hope the Intel switch allows Apple to loosen up and start offering more BTO options like that. I think the current 2.16Ghz BTO option on the MacBook Pro is a good sign we may see just that.
Quote:
Originally posted by backtomac
I don't mean to fight you point for point, after all were on the same team, but the MBPs are competetively priced with their comparable pc products. Read link below.
That's an interesting article. I wasn't aware that the MacBook Pro's were as competitive as they are. I thought it was interesting the author didn't go as far as to point out how the Dell is 1.6 inches fat and 8 pounds heavy. That's certainly something worth considering. Doesn't Dell offer anything that isn't a battery-powered gorilla?
Still, that Inspiron/MacBook Pro comparison ties in well with the BTO options ryanh mentioned. If Apple offered more mix and matching in the BTO department instead of just picking price points and filling them with enough components to justify the cost, it would be easier for a joe shmoe like myself to comparison shop. That way, one could BTO a 15" MacBook Pro with a lesser processor, graphics card, hard drive, etc and not have to spend $1,999 just to get an Apple laptop that can do better than 1024x768. Alternatively, if someone wants a 13.3" MacBook Pro they don't need to settle for the lowliest Core Duo processor and a lesser graphics card.
Obviously they'd still have their pricepoint fillers for retail sales, which most customers would still purchase, but that doesn't mean they can't allow more BTO options at the online store. I could be totally wrong, but there shouldn't be any thermal issues with putting a 2.16Ghz Core Duo in a 13" MacBook anymore than there would be with the current 15", as they're the same thickness.
On a side note, the software included with that Inspiron is really depressing. It's painfully apparent why buying a new PC is so boring; it doesn't come with any new cool stuff you can play with. It's faster than the last one you bought, and that's all it has going for it. Hell, it's not even thinner or lighter than my girlfriend's 2001 model Inspiron.
Buying a new PC is no more exciting than buying a new router when your current one burns out.
Why doesn't Apple offer a 1.67GHz Core Duo MacBook Pro for a lower price?
they can't do that right now coze there are still people who ordered 1.67GHz MBP, who got upgraded to 1.8GHz MBP - who will want the 1.67GHz and the money deferential back = nightmare for Apple.
AMEN!!!! i was just in best buy yesterday.... and ive got to say that the 13.3 inch widescreen vaios are too small!!!!!!!! horizontally its as good as your girl freind but vertically? not a chance, too small!!
APPLE HAS TO GIVE US 14.1 inch widescreen ibook.........
and btw the 14.1 vaios have core duo 2.0 ghz chips for between $1299 $1499 why cant apple do that? just because apple has premo build quality is the only reason i can think of at this point.
APPLE HAS TO GIVE US 14.1 inch widescreen ibook.........
Both ThinkSecret and Appleinsider are claiming the next iBooks will be built around a 13.3" screen. I think the 13.3" would do them well because it makes for a more compact laptop (remember that a lot of iBooks end up in backpacks) and because they'd be creeping in on the MacBook Pro's with anything larger.
Quote:
Originally posted by Catman4d2
and btw the 14.1 vaios have core duo 2.0 ghz chips for between $1299 $1499 why cant apple do that? just because apple has premo build quality is the only reason i can think of at this point.
I tried hard to find such a computer on Best Buy's website, and the closest I could come was a Centrino Duo 1.83Ghz for $1,999. While you may have seen a stripped down Pentium M 2Ghz notebook in that price range, I believe you are quite mistaken when you say they had a 2Ghz Core Duo chip in that price range. After a quick google search, I can't even find a 2Ghz Core Duo Vaio in existence (outside of BTOing one at Sony's site).
after reading & posting forum after forum about the upcoming macbooks i wonder if i shouldn't just buy me an 12" ibook or a powerbook right away? since what i need is the smallest form factor that apple has.. and unless they come up with a 12.1 wxga or 13.3 wxga I have no used for any other.. the 14" is already too big for me to carry around all the time..
what do ya say?
i say wait because although there may not be a period of product-availability overlap, you'll likely be able to get a 12" ibiok from the rebate store on the site or somewhere like overstock.com
i say wait because although there may not be a period of product-availability overlap, you'll likely be able to get a 12" ibiok from the rebate store on the site or somewhere like overstock.com
Comments
Originally posted by mattyj
Since when did the iBook run parallel with the mac mini?
iBook = portable iMac
MacBook Pro = portable PowerMac
Historically, it's been more like this, spec-wise:
iBook = class of its own as the weakest Mac
PowerBook = portable iMac
PowerMac = class of its own as the most powerful Mac
Apple's "pro" vs "consumer" lines have never been separated by spec, because portables have always been less powerful than desktops (excepting a brief moment back when the G3 was king). There's not enough history behind the Mini yet to say for sure "iBook = Mini", but it would make plenty of sense.
Originally posted by mattyj
Since when did the iBook run parallel with the mac mini?
What Towel and hmurchison said. The iBook hasn't been even remotely close to the iMac's specs since the G3 era, if ever. Look at today's iMac and MacBook Pro. The MacBook Pro carries a $700-$800 premium over it's iMac equivalent. Using that same equation, a $999 iBook with the $599 Mac Mini's specs would be an absolute steal, especially considering the Mac Mini doesn't include a screen. Not that I personally feel it would be a steal, just that in comparison to Apple's other offerings it would be.
backtomac, I agree that Apple should do more to separate it's MacBook and MacBook Pro offerings, but as things stand what they're giving us for $1,999 isn't a whole lot. That's what makes this so difficult. If these iBook replacements didn't arrive until the additional 2.33Ghz Core Duo and processor price cuts show up in May, then there would be more options for Apple to use in the sub-$1,999 category. Or even better, a price-drop on the current $1,999 model to something like $1,799. As it is today, all we've got to fill a $1,000 gap is 1.5Ghz and 1.66Ghz Core Solos, a 1.67Ghz Core Duo, and a graphics card or lack-therof.
DHagan4755, because a 1" display difference doesn't seem like enough between $1,499 and $1,999.
because a 1" display difference doesn't seem like enough between $1,499 and $1,999.
Not really. If it's got integrated graphics and a lower resolution display, that could be a selling point for the 15.4-inch MacBook Pro.
Originally posted by DHagan4755
Why a 13.3-inch widescreen at the $1499 price range? Why not a 14.1-inch widescreen?
I'm not hoping for a 13.3" widescreen specifically, but something wider and no less tall than the 12.1" 4x3 screen. Oh...and while I'm asking for stuff...I want no fewer horizontal pixels than I have on my TiBook (1280). Oh...and world peace too.
Voch
Originally posted by DHagan4755
Not really. If it's got integrated graphics and a lower resolution display, that could be a selling point for the 15.4-inch MacBook Pro.
I really hope we don't have to spend $1,999 to get an Apple notebook with a dedicated graphics card. That's pretty steep, even for Apple.
Originally posted by Cory Bauer
I really hope we don't have to spend $1,999 to get an Apple notebook with a dedicated graphics card. That's pretty steep, even for Apple.
Yup, I agree. Let's hope for the best.
By the way, are you related to Jack Bauer?
Originally posted by Cory Bauer
I really hope we don't have to spend $1,999 to get an Apple notebook with a dedicated graphics card. That's pretty steep, even for Apple.
When merom comes out I think chances will be better. The MBP line can move to these chips while the iBook line can take on faster core duo chips and fold in a cheap video card. That would give good separation to consumer and pro lines yet allow Apple to offer a pretty powerful entry level laptop. Again, just my 2 cents.
what do ya say?
It wasn't until recently that Apple has completely negated the PB line, especially the 12", and consolidate it into 3 models. Now that there are two 15" MBP models, I can see them going back to something similar like this scheme or atleast offering more BTO options on the smallest MBP [CPU upgrade].
Because of this, I'm not sure why anyone hasnt mentioned putting a 1.88 Core Duo in a 13.3 MBP as either a second, higher end model or as a BTO option.
Apple is having production problems with the MacBook Pro so perhaps this will come as soon as they work out the kinks?
Originally posted by Cory Bauer
[ but as things stand what they're giving us for $1,999 isn't a whole lot. [/B]
I don't mean to fight you point for point, after all were on the same team, but the MBPs are competetively priced with their comparable pc products. Read link below.
http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/02...son2/index.php
Originally posted by DHagan4755
By the way, are you related to Jack Bauer?
Jack is my younger brother. I taught him everything he knows.
Originally posted by Zenga
after reading & posting forum after forum about the upcoming macbooks i wonder if i shouldn't just buy me an 12" ibook or a powerbook right away?
Please don't do that unless you're content with 1024x768 and need to run PowerPC-only apps.
Originally posted by ryanh
Because of this, I'm not sure why anyone hasnt mentioned putting a 1.88 Core Duo in a 13.3 MBP as either a second, higher end model or as a BTO option.
Originally posted by DHagan4755
Why doesn't Apple offer a 1.67GHz Core Duo MacBook Pro for a lower price?
Both very interesting points. In a perfect world, you could go to the online Apple Store and BTO a 13.3" with a 1.87Ghz Core Duo, or a 15.4" with a 1.67Ghz Core Duo, depending on whether you favor size or performance. I very much hope the Intel switch allows Apple to loosen up and start offering more BTO options like that. I think the current 2.16Ghz BTO option on the MacBook Pro is a good sign we may see just that.
Originally posted by backtomac
I don't mean to fight you point for point, after all were on the same team, but the MBPs are competetively priced with their comparable pc products. Read link below.
http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/02...son2/index.php
That's an interesting article. I wasn't aware that the MacBook Pro's were as competitive as they are. I thought it was interesting the author didn't go as far as to point out how the Dell is 1.6 inches fat and 8 pounds heavy. That's certainly something worth considering. Doesn't Dell offer anything that isn't a battery-powered gorilla?
Still, that Inspiron/MacBook Pro comparison ties in well with the BTO options ryanh mentioned. If Apple offered more mix and matching in the BTO department instead of just picking price points and filling them with enough components to justify the cost, it would be easier for a joe shmoe like myself to comparison shop. That way, one could BTO a 15" MacBook Pro with a lesser processor, graphics card, hard drive, etc and not have to spend $1,999 just to get an Apple laptop that can do better than 1024x768. Alternatively, if someone wants a 13.3" MacBook Pro they don't need to settle for the lowliest Core Duo processor and a lesser graphics card.
Obviously they'd still have their pricepoint fillers for retail sales, which most customers would still purchase, but that doesn't mean they can't allow more BTO options at the online store. I could be totally wrong, but there shouldn't be any thermal issues with putting a 2.16Ghz Core Duo in a 13" MacBook anymore than there would be with the current 15", as they're the same thickness.
On a side note, the software included with that Inspiron is really depressing. It's painfully apparent why buying a new PC is so boring; it doesn't come with any new cool stuff you can play with. It's faster than the last one you bought, and that's all it has going for it. Hell, it's not even thinner or lighter than my girlfriend's 2001 model Inspiron.
Buying a new PC is no more exciting than buying a new router when your current one burns out.
Originally posted by DHagan4755
Why doesn't Apple offer a 1.67GHz Core Duo MacBook Pro for a lower price?
they can't do that right now coze there are still people who ordered 1.67GHz MBP, who got upgraded to 1.8GHz MBP - who will want the 1.67GHz and the money deferential back = nightmare for Apple.
$1,299 MacBook (plastic enclosure)
1.66Ghz Intel Core Duo
14" Widescreen display at 1280x800
512MB memory (667MHz DDR2 SDRAM)
80GB Serial ATA hard drive
Intel GMA950 graphics processor
Slot-load SuperDrive (DVD±RW/CD-RW)
Built-in AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0
Apple Remote
AMEN!!!! i was just in best buy yesterday.... and ive got to say that the 13.3 inch widescreen vaios are too small!!!!!!!! horizontally its as good as your girl freind but vertically? not a chance, too small!!
APPLE HAS TO GIVE US 14.1 inch widescreen ibook.........
and btw the 14.1 vaios have core duo 2.0 ghz chips for between $1299 $1499 why cant apple do that? just because apple has premo build quality is the only reason i can think of at this point.
Originally posted by Catman4d2
APPLE HAS TO GIVE US 14.1 inch widescreen ibook.........
Both ThinkSecret and Appleinsider are claiming the next iBooks will be built around a 13.3" screen. I think the 13.3" would do them well because it makes for a more compact laptop (remember that a lot of iBooks end up in backpacks) and because they'd be creeping in on the MacBook Pro's with anything larger.
Originally posted by Catman4d2
and btw the 14.1 vaios have core duo 2.0 ghz chips for between $1299 $1499 why cant apple do that? just because apple has premo build quality is the only reason i can think of at this point.
I tried hard to find such a computer on Best Buy's website, and the closest I could come was a Centrino Duo 1.83Ghz for $1,999. While you may have seen a stripped down Pentium M 2Ghz notebook in that price range, I believe you are quite mistaken when you say they had a 2Ghz Core Duo chip in that price range. After a quick google search, I can't even find a 2Ghz Core Duo Vaio in existence (outside of BTOing one at Sony's site).
Originally posted by Zenga
after reading & posting forum after forum about the upcoming macbooks i wonder if i shouldn't just buy me an 12" ibook or a powerbook right away? since what i need is the smallest form factor that apple has.. and unless they come up with a 12.1 wxga or 13.3 wxga I have no used for any other.. the 14" is already too big for me to carry around all the time..
what do ya say?
i say wait because although there may not be a period of product-availability overlap, you'll likely be able to get a 12" ibiok from the rebate store on the site or somewhere like overstock.com
Originally posted by icibaqu
i say wait because although there may not be a period of product-availability overlap, you'll likely be able to get a 12" ibiok from the rebate store on the site or somewhere like overstock.com
dude.. that looks like a chick store
thankx anyway!