I just don't think it will have a 10 inch screen or be any less than the width of a standard keyboard.
I don't know why you're hung up on this. Point to one person anywhere not only in this topic but any other topic here who said there should be a 10" screen. Nobody even brought it up, but you continue to rail against it. The common wish has been something in the 11-12" widescreen regime, both of which would allow for a full-size keyboard. Even if it used a subscale keyboard, are you hating it from experience, or just assuming you'll hate it? Have you actually used one? I owned a Windows CE handheld computer for a couple of years and adapted very quickly to touch-typing on its 92% keyboard, where I could still do about 40-50wpm. If Apple had a one-pound ultraportable like that, I'd be willing to pay $2500 for it, even if it only had a ULV 1GHz Core Duo. One pound means you basically don't even remember you're carrying it in your bag. I'm speaking from actual, hands-on experience, not assumption. Not to mention I really loved the 8-hour actual battery life. If only it ran OS X. But I don't think Apple's going that small; just saying it's not as bad as you think.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
There are very few things that a MBP can't do these days. The difference between my Mac Pro and MBP are small enough that there are days that I don't bother booting the Mac Pro and just run a little slower on my MBP because all my current work files are on there. There are days I need every cycle I can find but most days I don't.
I think that basically says you're not a power-hungry professional. There are quite a few people out there who desperately need their Mac Pro quads and wouldn't trade down to the dual-core MBPs for their daily work.
I still doubt that this would be the case. It seems people ask for something more voluminous than a Cube, for easy access and use of standard desktop components, but less humongous than a Mac Pro for obvious reasons.
I don't agree. The Mini is doing ok without any real upgradability.
This was 9"x9"x9". More than three Mini's could fit inside.
You could easily get a 3.5" hi capacity drive in there, as well as a decent graphics card (replacable), a fast Core2Dual board (replacable), and an extra slot, as well as every connector you would need.
The Cube wasn't difficult to take apart at all. It wasn't difficult to replace boards, hard drives, or memory modules either.
It's not a mini tower, but it offered vastly more than the Mini does.
I don't know why you're hung up on this. Point to one person anywhere not only in this topic but any other topic here who said there should be a 10" screen. Nobody even brought it up, but you continue to rail against it.
I would point to posts #22 and #31 in this thread. Perhaps not everyone thinks that way but my impression is that when someone wants an "ultra-portable" that's what they're thinking. I guess I'm wrong.
I think that basically says you're not a power-hungry professional. There are quite a few people out there who desperately need their Mac Pro quads and wouldn't trade down to the dual-core MBPs for their daily work.
/shrug
I do 3D development and need to run fairly intensive apps from time to time. I deal with having thousands of sprites, moderate to high poly counts and (low) hundreds of thousands of data points to process.
My MBP is about as fast as my older (pre-Woodcreast) dual processor 3Ghz Xeon workstation that many "power hungry pro's" prabably still have in their shops. The difference is that I can work from home or Starbucks. The biggest limitation for the MBP isn't the lack of CPU cycles but that when mobile I simply don't have the screen real-estate. Which is solved when I attach the 30" ACD at work but not so good at home. That and sometimes 2GB isn't enough. But 80% of the time it and the MBP is.
The operative word in your second sentence isn't "quite a" but "few".
Personally I didn't find this upgrade that appealing, although I do like the black case.
I hope they do a lot more with the MacBook Pro once nvidia releases the GeForce 8M pro (enthusiast) series.
I think Apple is being cautious.
Remember that everyone complained that Apple didn't move to 4 core chips when others did? They had a reason.
While I don't pretend to know what their plans are, I would suggest that they are planning for a more substantial re-work later on than can be done now.
I do 3D development and need to run fairly intensive apps from time to time. I deal with having thousands of sprites, moderate to high poly counts and (low) hundreds of thousands of data points to process.
My MBP is about as fast as my older (pre-Woodcreast) dual processor 3Ghz Xeon workstation that many "power hungry pro's" prabably still have in their shops. The difference is that I can work from home or Starbucks. The biggest limitation for the MBP isn't the lack of CPU cycles but that when mobile I simply don't have the screen real-estate. Which is solved when I attach the 30" ACD at work but not so good at home. That and sometimes 2GB isn't enough. But 80% of the time it and the MBP is.
The operative word in your second sentence isn't "quite a" but "few".
Vinea
You're saying that expandabiity isn't of importance to you.
I don't know why you're hung up on this. Point to one person anywhere not only in this topic but any other topic here who said there should be a 10" screen. Nobody even brought it up, but you continue to rail against it. The common wish has been something in the 11-12" widescreen regime, both of which would allow for a full-size keyboard. Even if it used a subscale keyboard, are you hating it from experience, or just assuming you'll hate it? Have you actually used one? I owned a Windows CE handheld computer for a couple of years and adapted very quickly to touch-typing on its 92% keyboard, where I could still do about 40-50wpm. If Apple had a one-pound ultraportable like that, I'd be willing to pay $2500 for it, even if it only had a ULV 1GHz Core Duo. One pound means you basically don't even remember you're carrying it in your bag. I'm speaking from actual, hands-on experience, not assumption. Not to mention I really loved the 8-hour actual battery life. If only it ran OS X. But I don't think Apple's going that small; just saying it's not as bad as you think.
Kolchak, as usual you're right on target. The population on this board is skewed towards bigger screens and fast video cards.I think many (most?) of the posters on this thread have never used an ultraportable on a daily basis. As a result, they don't know the great benefits afforded by such devices.
As to the market for ultraportables (UPs) , I have personally seen a mass move over the years to such devices by engineers and architects for field work in designing or retrofitting Pharma manufacturing facilities (running AutoCad) , CEOs (who 10 years ago wouldn't touch a computer of any size or power anywhere), statisticians running SAS JMP software, relational database programmers running Access and 4D (Forth Dimension), Gene jockeys running specialized apps to map genomes, MDs running specialized drug and diagnostic software, financial analysts running technical analysis software (Channel analysis, Bollinger bands) & on and on.
I just recently attended a Biotech Conference in Boston where the companies presented to the financial community (Goldman, Merril Lynch, Bear Stearns etc,). All of the 1 kilogram (+/-)Wintel UPs were on parade--Sony, Lenovo, Fujitsu, Panasonic, LG, Asus, etc. (Bitching about Vista's problems and the really functional great new ribbon interface in Office 2007 were big topics of informal over-beer discussions).
The UP market is huge! I always informally poll the folks I meet at these Dog & Pony shindigs about a Mac UP. The response is almost always the same--I'd love to have the choice of getting a Mac UP but they don't make one. The CEO boys are big targets--they want status and cool, even the older fogies. Now that they have gotten over their computer-phobia, cool , slick & status is what they want (just like their cars, apparel, watches, phones etc).
I've posted before on this but I have to say it again. The Japanese reps at the Conference have strong Asian brand loyalties but a cutting edge Mac UP--1 kg with C2D,12" screen, flash memory and multi-touch would get them seriously interested. The Asians I meet want the newest, slickest and smallest (see the soon to be released Song G).
Finally and one more time, battery life for road warriors is becoming less important because there are now AC plugs everywhere. The next frontier is IMO not longer life batteries but smaller AC bricks.
I hope AI is wrong and Apple make a UP that has a smaller screen than 13". That's to big to easily use on an airplane IMO, unless you're in first class. Like lfe2211 said, I was recently at a conference and the small UPs were out in full force. One presenter used a Macbook but most had Windows machines and UPs were commonplace.
You're saying that expandabiity isn't of importance to you.
Given the only thing in the Mac Pro's slots are video cards...nope. I have access to a large network store and if need be a render farm with fast access to their own RAID arrays.
I suppose that if I wanted dual 30" displays I'd have to run my Pro all the time but there really isn't anything I need as a card. Any data capture cards sit in their own PC and arrive via IP or gets chunked off and pre-processed into a database.
I dunno...other than the ability to go above 3GB for CS3 and other memory hungry apps the 2 cores I'm short don't seem to be that crippling even within my own multi-threaded apps. If I had an octo Mac Pro...that might be a different story but for anything really nasty I'd want to take over one of the blade servers. Even an Octo Mac Pro would be chewing away for a long time even if our blades are almost all older Xeons...
Not like I could get anything done on my desktop if I've got all 4 cores blazing away at a job better suited for 26. Going to 8 cores only really halves the duration of the pain...not reduce the severity though I can probably juggle priorities so that the desktop runs okay.
Gee, at which point I can read mail and surf the web.
Given the only thing in the Mac Pro's slots are video cards...nope. I have access to a large network store and if need be a render farm with fast access to their own RAID arrays.
I suppose that if I wanted dual 30" displays I'd have to run my Pro all the time but there really isn't anything I need as a card. Any data capture cards sit in their own PC and arrive via IP or gets chunked off and pre-processed into a database.
I dunno...other than the ability to go above 3GB for CS3 and other memory hungry apps the 2 cores I'm short don't seem to be that crippling even within my own multi-threaded apps. If I had an octo Mac Pro...that might be a different story but for anything really nasty I'd want to take over one of the blade servers. Even an Octo Mac Pro would be chewing away for a long time even if our blades are almost all older Xeons...
Not like I could get anything done on my desktop if I've got all 4 cores blazing away at a job better suited for 26. Going to 8 cores only really halves the duration of the pain...not reduce the severity though I can probably juggle priorities so that the desktop runs okay.
Gee, at which point I can read mail and surf the web.
Vinea
So it seems to me that a new MBP with a higher rez screen (I know how you feel about that), faster 45 nm chip, 4 GB RAM, a somewhat better GPU, and good, fast storage, would set you up for the next year.
I dunno about huge but I'd certainly agree with lucrative and I'd buy one. The MBP may be okay as a desktop replacement and for some demo's on the road but sucky as a portable in general. Not even a 13" would be THAT great but hey, vs a 10" Sony and only windows/linux vs a thin 13" Mac I'd go Mac.
A 10" fliptop tablet that was ultrathin would be ideal. Most of the time I need to scribble stuff down at meetings or do some relatively unobtrusive surfing. A multitouch or pen interface is good for that.
So it seems to me that a new MBP with a higher rez screen (I know how you feel about that), faster 45 nm chip, 4 GB RAM, a somewhat better GPU, and good, fast storage, would set you up for the next year.
I'd rather see an ultra portable tablet or laptop...I'll have to live with my MBP and Mac Pro for a couple, three years...but an ultra portable I might be able to convince someone I need.
I hope AI is wrong and Apple make a UP that has a smaller screen than 13". That's to big to easily use on an airplane IMO, unless you're in first class.
I've done this with a 14" 4:3 and your comment really didn't ring true for me in coach. A 15" or 17" wide would be too awkward.
I took my MBP(15") to Houston and when someone put their seat back the computer was unuseable. I sat next to my son who is six and lateral room was ok. An 11" or 12" would seem best to me in my experience. YMMV.
I took my MBP(15") to Houston and when someone put their seat back the computer was unuseable. I sat next to my son who is six and lateral room was ok. An 11" or 12" would seem best to me in my experience. YMMV.
My 15" MBP widescreen is considerably wider than my 14" 4x3. The 13" widescreen should do fine, I think. The height of my screen was really the only thing that I might reduce to make it work better, and a 13" wide would do just that.
I dunno about huge but I'd certainly agree with lucrative and I'd buy one. The MBP may be okay as a desktop replacement and for some demo's on the road but sucky as a portable in general. Not even a 13" would be THAT great but hey, vs a 10" Sony and only windows/linux vs a thin 13" Mac I'd go Mac.
A 10" fliptop tablet that was ultrathin would be ideal. Most of the time I need to scribble stuff down at meetings or do some relatively unobtrusive surfing. A multitouch or pen interface is good for that.
Comments
I just don't think it will have a 10 inch screen or be any less than the width of a standard keyboard.
I don't know why you're hung up on this. Point to one person anywhere not only in this topic but any other topic here who said there should be a 10" screen. Nobody even brought it up, but you continue to rail against it. The common wish has been something in the 11-12" widescreen regime, both of which would allow for a full-size keyboard. Even if it used a subscale keyboard, are you hating it from experience, or just assuming you'll hate it? Have you actually used one? I owned a Windows CE handheld computer for a couple of years and adapted very quickly to touch-typing on its 92% keyboard, where I could still do about 40-50wpm. If Apple had a one-pound ultraportable like that, I'd be willing to pay $2500 for it, even if it only had a ULV 1GHz Core Duo. One pound means you basically don't even remember you're carrying it in your bag. I'm speaking from actual, hands-on experience, not assumption. Not to mention I really loved the 8-hour actual battery life. If only it ran OS X. But I don't think Apple's going that small; just saying it's not as bad as you think.
There are very few things that a MBP can't do these days. The difference between my Mac Pro and MBP are small enough that there are days that I don't bother booting the Mac Pro and just run a little slower on my MBP because all my current work files are on there. There are days I need every cycle I can find but most days I don't.
I think that basically says you're not a power-hungry professional. There are quite a few people out there who desperately need their Mac Pro quads and wouldn't trade down to the dual-core MBPs for their daily work.
I still doubt that this would be the case. It seems people ask for something more voluminous than a Cube, for easy access and use of standard desktop components, but less humongous than a Mac Pro for obvious reasons.
I don't agree. The Mini is doing ok without any real upgradability.
This was 9"x9"x9". More than three Mini's could fit inside.
You could easily get a 3.5" hi capacity drive in there, as well as a decent graphics card (replacable), a fast Core2Dual board (replacable), and an extra slot, as well as every connector you would need.
The Cube wasn't difficult to take apart at all. It wasn't difficult to replace boards, hard drives, or memory modules either.
It's not a mini tower, but it offered vastly more than the Mini does.
I don't know why you're hung up on this. Point to one person anywhere not only in this topic but any other topic here who said there should be a 10" screen. Nobody even brought it up, but you continue to rail against it.
I would point to posts #22 and #31 in this thread. Perhaps not everyone thinks that way but my impression is that when someone wants an "ultra-portable" that's what they're thinking. I guess I'm wrong.
I hope they do a lot more with the MacBook Pro once nvidia releases the GeForce 8M pro (enthusiast) series.
I think that basically says you're not a power-hungry professional. There are quite a few people out there who desperately need their Mac Pro quads and wouldn't trade down to the dual-core MBPs for their daily work.
/shrug
I do 3D development and need to run fairly intensive apps from time to time. I deal with having thousands of sprites, moderate to high poly counts and (low) hundreds of thousands of data points to process.
My MBP is about as fast as my older (pre-Woodcreast) dual processor 3Ghz Xeon workstation that many "power hungry pro's" prabably still have in their shops. The difference is that I can work from home or Starbucks. The biggest limitation for the MBP isn't the lack of CPU cycles but that when mobile I simply don't have the screen real-estate. Which is solved when I attach the 30" ACD at work but not so good at home. That and sometimes 2GB isn't enough. But 80% of the time it and the MBP is.
The operative word in your second sentence isn't "quite a" but "few".
Vinea
Personally I didn't find this upgrade that appealing, although I do like the black case.
I hope they do a lot more with the MacBook Pro once nvidia releases the GeForce 8M pro (enthusiast) series.
I think Apple is being cautious.
Remember that everyone complained that Apple didn't move to 4 core chips when others did? They had a reason.
While I don't pretend to know what their plans are, I would suggest that they are planning for a more substantial re-work later on than can be done now.
/shrug
I do 3D development and need to run fairly intensive apps from time to time. I deal with having thousands of sprites, moderate to high poly counts and (low) hundreds of thousands of data points to process.
My MBP is about as fast as my older (pre-Woodcreast) dual processor 3Ghz Xeon workstation that many "power hungry pro's" prabably still have in their shops. The difference is that I can work from home or Starbucks. The biggest limitation for the MBP isn't the lack of CPU cycles but that when mobile I simply don't have the screen real-estate. Which is solved when I attach the 30" ACD at work but not so good at home. That and sometimes 2GB isn't enough. But 80% of the time it and the MBP is.
The operative word in your second sentence isn't "quite a" but "few".
Vinea
You're saying that expandabiity isn't of importance to you.
I don't know why you're hung up on this. Point to one person anywhere not only in this topic but any other topic here who said there should be a 10" screen. Nobody even brought it up, but you continue to rail against it. The common wish has been something in the 11-12" widescreen regime, both of which would allow for a full-size keyboard. Even if it used a subscale keyboard, are you hating it from experience, or just assuming you'll hate it? Have you actually used one? I owned a Windows CE handheld computer for a couple of years and adapted very quickly to touch-typing on its 92% keyboard, where I could still do about 40-50wpm. If Apple had a one-pound ultraportable like that, I'd be willing to pay $2500 for it, even if it only had a ULV 1GHz Core Duo. One pound means you basically don't even remember you're carrying it in your bag. I'm speaking from actual, hands-on experience, not assumption. Not to mention I really loved the 8-hour actual battery life. If only it ran OS X. But I don't think Apple's going that small; just saying it's not as bad as you think.
Kolchak, as usual you're right on target. The population on this board is skewed towards bigger screens and fast video cards.I think many (most?) of the posters on this thread have never used an ultraportable on a daily basis. As a result, they don't know the great benefits afforded by such devices.
As to the market for ultraportables (UPs) , I have personally seen a mass move over the years to such devices by engineers and architects for field work in designing or retrofitting Pharma manufacturing facilities (running AutoCad) , CEOs (who 10 years ago wouldn't touch a computer of any size or power anywhere), statisticians running SAS JMP software, relational database programmers running Access and 4D (Forth Dimension), Gene jockeys running specialized apps to map genomes, MDs running specialized drug and diagnostic software, financial analysts running technical analysis software (Channel analysis, Bollinger bands) & on and on.
I just recently attended a Biotech Conference in Boston where the companies presented to the financial community (Goldman, Merril Lynch, Bear Stearns etc,). All of the 1 kilogram (+/-)Wintel UPs were on parade--Sony, Lenovo, Fujitsu, Panasonic, LG, Asus, etc. (Bitching about Vista's problems and the really functional great new ribbon interface in Office 2007 were big topics of informal over-beer discussions).
The UP market is huge! I always informally poll the folks I meet at these Dog & Pony shindigs about a Mac UP. The response is almost always the same--I'd love to have the choice of getting a Mac UP but they don't make one. The CEO boys are big targets--they want status and cool, even the older fogies. Now that they have gotten over their computer-phobia, cool , slick & status is what they want (just like their cars, apparel, watches, phones etc).
I've posted before on this but I have to say it again. The Japanese reps at the Conference have strong Asian brand loyalties but a cutting edge Mac UP--1 kg with C2D,12" screen, flash memory and multi-touch would get them seriously interested. The Asians I meet want the newest, slickest and smallest (see the soon to be released Song G).
Finally and one more time, battery life for road warriors is becoming less important because there are now AC plugs everywhere. The next frontier is IMO not longer life batteries but smaller AC bricks.
You're saying that expandabiity isn't of importance to you.
Given the only thing in the Mac Pro's slots are video cards...nope. I have access to a large network store and if need be a render farm with fast access to their own RAID arrays.
I suppose that if I wanted dual 30" displays I'd have to run my Pro all the time but there really isn't anything I need as a card. Any data capture cards sit in their own PC and arrive via IP or gets chunked off and pre-processed into a database.
I dunno...other than the ability to go above 3GB for CS3 and other memory hungry apps the 2 cores I'm short don't seem to be that crippling even within my own multi-threaded apps. If I had an octo Mac Pro...that might be a different story but for anything really nasty I'd want to take over one of the blade servers. Even an Octo Mac Pro would be chewing away for a long time even if our blades are almost all older Xeons...
Not like I could get anything done on my desktop if I've got all 4 cores blazing away at a job better suited for 26. Going to 8 cores only really halves the duration of the pain...not reduce the severity though I can probably juggle priorities so that the desktop runs okay.
Gee, at which point I can read mail and surf the web.
Vinea
Given the only thing in the Mac Pro's slots are video cards...nope. I have access to a large network store and if need be a render farm with fast access to their own RAID arrays.
I suppose that if I wanted dual 30" displays I'd have to run my Pro all the time but there really isn't anything I need as a card. Any data capture cards sit in their own PC and arrive via IP or gets chunked off and pre-processed into a database.
I dunno...other than the ability to go above 3GB for CS3 and other memory hungry apps the 2 cores I'm short don't seem to be that crippling even within my own multi-threaded apps. If I had an octo Mac Pro...that might be a different story but for anything really nasty I'd want to take over one of the blade servers. Even an Octo Mac Pro would be chewing away for a long time even if our blades are almost all older Xeons...
Not like I could get anything done on my desktop if I've got all 4 cores blazing away at a job better suited for 26. Going to 8 cores only really halves the duration of the pain...not reduce the severity though I can probably juggle priorities so that the desktop runs okay.
Gee, at which point I can read mail and surf the web.
Vinea
So it seems to me that a new MBP with a higher rez screen (I know how you feel about that), faster 45 nm chip, 4 GB RAM, a somewhat better GPU, and good, fast storage, would set you up for the next year.
The UP market is huge!
I dunno about huge but I'd certainly agree with lucrative and I'd buy one. The MBP may be okay as a desktop replacement and for some demo's on the road but sucky as a portable in general. Not even a 13" would be THAT great but hey, vs a 10" Sony and only windows/linux vs a thin 13" Mac I'd go Mac.
A 10" fliptop tablet that was ultrathin would be ideal. Most of the time I need to scribble stuff down at meetings or do some relatively unobtrusive surfing. A multitouch or pen interface is good for that.
Vinea
So it seems to me that a new MBP with a higher rez screen (I know how you feel about that), faster 45 nm chip, 4 GB RAM, a somewhat better GPU, and good, fast storage, would set you up for the next year.
I'd rather see an ultra portable tablet or laptop...I'll have to live with my MBP and Mac Pro for a couple, three years...but an ultra portable I might be able to convince someone I need.
Vinea
I hope AI is wrong and Apple make a UP that has a smaller screen than 13". That's to big to easily use on an airplane IMO, unless you're in first class.
I've done this with a 14" 4:3 and your comment really didn't ring true for me in coach. A 15" or 17" wide would be too awkward.
I took my MBP(15") to Houston and when someone put their seat back the computer was unuseable. I sat next to my son who is six and lateral room was ok. An 11" or 12" would seem best to me in my experience. YMMV.
My 15" MBP widescreen is considerably wider than my 14" 4x3. The 13" widescreen should do fine, I think. The height of my screen was really the only thing that I might reduce to make it work better, and a 13" wide would do just that.
I dunno about huge but I'd certainly agree with lucrative and I'd buy one. The MBP may be okay as a desktop replacement and for some demo's on the road but sucky as a portable in general. Not even a 13" would be THAT great but hey, vs a 10" Sony and only windows/linux vs a thin 13" Mac I'd go Mac.
A 10" fliptop tablet that was ultrathin would be ideal. Most of the time I need to scribble stuff down at meetings or do some relatively unobtrusive surfing. A multitouch or pen interface is good for that.
Vinea
Right. Lucrative not necessarily huge.
http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/17/s...est-of-both-w/
That's how to do an ultraportable.
S
That's how to do an ultraportable.
Yep. When someone says ultraportable that's what comes to mind.