I see that there's a lot of people that are failing to see a lot of what really matters.
First off I'm going to say that I'm pissed off that they've done a bump on the MB because that means that we won't see no SR in it until... October? November? But second off I'm going to say: it's the logical thing to do because the MB is still not ready for the SR.
Why is SR important? Well people seem to see one reason for it: the X3100.
Well it is an important move, but I'll explain why they haven't put it yet on MB.
It's a much better chip than the one there's now and yet it costs 4 dollars (seriously, it costs 4 dollars).
The problem is that there are no serious drivers for it.
There are barely any serious drivers for it for Windows so I'm sure that Intel doesn't have any good ones for Apple yet either.
It's a lot easier to wait 'till Intel makes some decent ones and integrate them in Leopard and that's it.
Easier for Intel and easier for Apple. It's a win win for them.
And then there's another thing, people already know that the speed bump to SR is minimum but most people don't know this: although the SR is juuuust a little bit more power consuming when on load than the present Centrinos because it runs at a bit higher speed... it consumes a lot less when not on load because of two main reasons:
The CPU can get downclocked even lower than todays CPUs and can go into deeper sleep levels.
And second, because the motherboard can half it's speed to lower consumption when not in use, something that today's Centrino's motherboards can't do. Today's Centrino's motherboards always work at full speed, and that's something that isn't very power saving, is it.
So that means that for browsing the internet, chatting, watching DVDs, etc were the CPU load is low, the battery use will be lower, and if you add into that the LED display... I'm sure that you'll get a very very decent battery life. Too bad that the LED display is coming late on the MBs.
Why is it ok for the MBPs to have the SR earlier? There aren't any driver problems since MBPs don't use integrated graphics and Apple can justify MB->MBP overprice easily.
And now what a lot of people are waiting for: ==> When is Apple going to construct a MB version that's between MBs and MBPs? I don't need the fancy graphics of the MBPs but I do need a bigger screen than 13". A lower MBP configuration? A larger (not faster) MB version? It would make a lot of our lives easier
I bought my MacBook last saturday, been using it, and want to upgrade to the new specs...
does anyone know from experience if you don't have to pay the open box fee if exchanged for the newer version?
Not personal experience, but it has been said several times here and elsewhere that there is a restocking fee. Sorry. Sure someone can confirm first hand.
I agree, mixed feelings my friends. I haven't a clue what to think. Usually Apple times their product updates quite well, but this has no quite well about it.
What if Apple was throwing in the "extra" 2.16 chips they had in order to clear out the rest of their stock.....and are planning to unveil the sweetness in 3 weeks?
Haha, that would be sweet. But alas, they'd probably never do that....cause people would be mad if they bought one now and they upgrade to SR in 3 weeks.
Darn....it would be nice to have LED and SR in a macbook in time for the back to school buying season. (or rather, by like July) But it seems that that probably won't be happening now.
Either way my new computer will be freakin' awesome. more than 5 times better than the computer I'm on now in every way.
I agree, mixed feelings my friends. I haven't a clue what to think. Usually Apple times their product updates quite well, but this has no quite well about it.
What's so bad about it's timing?
The Mac Pro recently received 4 additional Cores as a BTO, and WWDC is about 26 Days, 6 Hours, and 25 Minutes away where we should see new hardware.
Surprised about the lack of a santa rosa update...
Oh well.
Yeah that really sucks!!!!
Lets face it this likely means that the coming Mac BooK Pro will be less that what many of us where hoping for. Either that or Apple really wants to differentiate the two machines. The problem is this machine will age real fast technology wise as Apple and other manufactures come out with more Santa Rosa Based machines. Even worst the low end machine got nothing in the way of a GPU boost and frankly it need this more than the CPU boost.
Does make me wonder what Apple has planned. Even more so it make me think that the Mac book "Thin" is more real than I at first thought.
In other words I take this lackluster update as a warning that something else is about to fill in the GPU gap. That is a midrange machine feature wise.
[QUOTE=solipsism;1081910]1) Santa Rosa offers very little performance improvement. Apple should wait until Santa Rosa's Robson is working well before implementing in the MacBook (Pro) lines. Plus, we'll definitely see it int he MBP before the MB.
{/quote]
I'm not sure where you got that idea. In any event Santa Rosa offers the average user a lot over the current chip set.
For examle:
1. improved GPU.
2. greater than 4 GB memory access.
3, improved FSB.
and host of other things.
It is enough of an improvement to make the MacBook a compelling low end machine, worthy of its price. Now we have a stale machine with a bump to the components that will have only minimal impact on the average user. In other words this machine is a joke for anyone looking for value in a low end (but expensive) machine.
Quote:
2) My *new* black MacBook has a 0.16GHz slower processor, 2x slower SuperDrive and 40GB less capacity than the new black MacBook. Will I be crying over these new release, calling foul on Apple and franticaly claiming my machine is now obsolete? Hell no!
Of course not! There is nothing worst than to listen to some of the whining we hear here when Apple releases a new machine.
That however does not discount that people have legitimate expectations and that is a notebook in Mac Books price range with competitive GPU / chip set hardware. Mind you we are not even talking about a separate GPU, rather just a state of he art integrated chip set. Frankly I would have been happy to see Apple go with an ATI/AMD or Nvidia chip set just to get back in the ball game.
Quote:
3) With the speed of the MacBok nd MacBook Pros getting this close and the optical drive of the MB being 2x faster than the 15" MBP, it's a safe bet that new Satna Rosa MacBook Pros with this new optical drive and larger HDDs will appear at WWDC in 3 weeks.
Yep! But this release today leads me to feel that the Mac Book Pro won't be breaking much new ground. Further that new Santa Rosa chip set is likely to be coupled with a new discreet GPU with its own memory. In other words even if the coming Mac book Pro is a let down the gap between it and the Mac Book will get much wider.
Even so I have this feeling that the coming Mac Book Pro will be a disappointment. I hope I'm wrong of course but this release of the Mac book did not raise the bar at all.
Apple will eventually update the MB Pro with Santa Rosa, but even if it does not, it will be not really a disappointment. At this moment, Santa Rosa offers only marginal performance improvements, despite the faster bus, and it would be more relevant in a Macbook update because of the new integrated graphics.
I'd like to know where people get this idea that Santa Rosa is such a mild manner upgrade. Especially when considered in the context of a Mac Book.
In the case of the Mac Book Pro it even has a lot to offer there. Now the integrated CPU is of little use but access to more memory isn't.
Quote:
Later improvements on the new Intel platform will bring more in performance but for now it is rather marketing than anything else (in the MBP field at least, since the MB would see a substantial graphics boost).
Of course we are discussing a machine that hasn't even been announced yet, but SR for MBP is a must. It might not be much in comparison to Intels coming Hafnium based machines but it certainly is a stop gap measure for at least a year. Remember the P in MBP which is an indication that the MBP are targeted at Pros. What pros often need more than anything else is memory. Considering how close Apples OS update is anything that is not capable of addressing beyond 4 gig bytes of memory shouldn't be considered pro.
Quote:
It is certain the Apple at this moment prepares the new graphics drivers for the autumn MB update. It needs time and it seems this will come with Leopard.
Apple can't be the caviler with the market. Especially if they want to continue on their gains in sales. If the perception is raised that Aple is again selling outdated and low performance machines sales will tank again just like they did with the G5 and the G4's. The reality is that people no the difference between modestly high priced stuff and modestly high priced crap.
The new MB is now crap, lets hope that Apple doesn't let us down with the coming MBP!!!!
My first reaction was this: "Motherf*&%(*&^%*&^$#&^*%^$(*&%(&^%)*&@(*&^%!)*&@% *^!%$%*&!_(*&@_(*&%^#@*&^%@*&@%*&^@%$%*!&^(!&^$%(@ *&^@!)(*^%)@*&^@%(&*^@%()*@&^)*!&^%(@&;^)^!(*&%!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
This reaction was very much on the spot in my estimation.
Quote:
This sucks...I had gotten used to the idea that my wife and I wouldn't have to share computers any more. Maybe in another 5 or 6 years...
ugh!
I think it is about time to simply say screw Apple and look at an alternative from HP or whomever. Immediately dump the MS operating system and install Linux.
I'm with you, in that I'm more than a bit disgusted with Apple and their ability or desire to bounce back and forth with this market manipulation. First they show some willingness to be proactive with the initial MB line even if it resulted in performance that in some ways was far from a MBP. Then the slip back into their old form of offering up grossly expensive outdated machines that seem to ignore the rest of the PC industry.
In this case it is all about the price tag and that price is way to high for outdated hardware.
I think it is about time to simply say screw Apple and look at an alternative from HP or whomever. Immediately dump the MS operating system and install Linux.
I'm with you, in that I'm more than a bit disgusted with Apple and their ability or desire to bounce back and forth with this market manipulation. First they show some willingness to be proactive with the initial MB line even if it resulted in performance that in some ways was far from a MBP. Then the slip back into their old form of offering up grossly expensive outdated machines that seem to ignore the rest of the PC industry.
lol at "the end is nigh" hysteria in some ppl.
sure, in some respects it is disappointing to just get a bumped MB, but if what Heffeque says is close to the mark, it is completely understandable. would you rather wait til october/leopard for a refreshed MB? if so, next update in c.6months isn't much longer than that.
I will say it again: damn Apple for not meeting my expectations for a super-sub-mini-pocketable notebook that has quad 3GHz cores all for $399. How dare they not meet MY expectations? Shame on Apple. Steve is the Devil!
Last time I checked, Apple's notebook sales had a market share of 10%, up quite a bit and riding on the current MacBook; it seems to be quite a popular machine and is making them money. Why go out on a limb to stretch the boundaries too much when you have something that works well? The MB will not get a chipset before the MBP, so that wasn't even a faint possibility. They brought the MB up to just below the MBP, which only suggests that a MBP update is in the works for the near future.
Apple stocks are also just readjusting to reality... they were climbing too fast, so the drop is a simple readjustment, again, by people outside of Apple who think they know more about the company than the company does itself.
Why go out on a limb to stretch the boundaries too much when you have something that works well?
The MacBook was upgraded to Core 2 Duo processors last November, it was clearly a mistake because the previous Core Duo models had sold very well. Why change? [/sarcasm]
Until now the MacBook was quite competitive and Apple has sold hundreds of thousands each quarter. If they're not kept current it will be more difficult to convince customers. Apple is confident enough to wait another six months, okay, but people won't feel obliged to pretend to like it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister
The MB will not get a chipset before the MBP, so that wasn't even a faint possibility. They brought the MB up to just below the MBP, which only suggests that a MBP update is in the works for the near future.
If a revised MBP is in the works for the next future it shouldn't be a problem to update the MacBook with Santa Rosa and the MBP three weeks later. Or Apple could wait for three weeks to revise the two models. This can?t be the reason.
If a revised MBP is in the works for the next future it shouldn't be a problem to update the MacBook with Santa Rosa and the MBP three weeks later. Or Apple could wait for three weeks to revise the two models. This can’t be the reason.
i respectfully disagree. whilst one doesn't want to put too much weight into the postings of any one individual on an internet forum, Heffeque has provided a valid reason why the MB would get only a bump now and MBP could be upgraded to Santa Rosa shortly.
I'd like to know where people get this idea that Santa Rosa is such a mild manner upgrade. Especially when considered in the context of a Mac Book.
You disagree, yet you quote parts of my post that say exactly what you too say: that Santa Rosa is at this point more important for the Macbook. Am I missing something here?
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
Of course we are discussing a machine that hasn't even been announced yet, but SR for MBP is a must. It might not be much in comparison to Intels coming Hafnium based machines but it certainly is a stop gap measure for at least a year. Remember the P in MBP which is an indication that the MBP are targeted at Pros. What pros often need more than anything else is memory. Considering how close Apples OS update is anything that is not capable of addressing beyond 4 gig bytes of memory shouldn't be considered pro.
And Santa Rosa offers more than 4 GB in the MB Pro how? Remember, it is Santa Rosa, not Santo Spirito.
I will say it again: damn Apple for not meeting my expectations for a super-sub-mini-pocketable notebook that has quad 3GHz cores all for $399. How dare they not meet MY expectations? Shame on Apple. Steve is the Devil!
Nice one Berg. :thumbsup:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister
Apple stocks are also just readjusting to reality... they were climbing too fast, so the drop is a simple readjustment, again, by people outside of Apple who think they know more about the company than the company does itself.
Word. Slight market readjustment. Is good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
I think it is about time to simply say screw Apple and look at an alternative from HP or whomever. Immediately dump the MS operating system and install Linux.
No worries. We'll be waiting when you come running back screaming.
Comments
i got a macbook on april 29th
is there any way i can get a discount to get my harddrive upgraded to 160 gb from 120. i have the black macbook with 1g of ram....
if this is possible please let me know. thanks!
First off I'm going to say that I'm pissed off that they've done a bump on the MB because that means that we won't see no SR in it until... October? November? But second off I'm going to say: it's the logical thing to do because the MB is still not ready for the SR.
Why is SR important? Well people seem to see one reason for it: the X3100.
Well it is an important move, but I'll explain why they haven't put it yet on MB.
It's a much better chip than the one there's now and yet it costs 4 dollars (seriously, it costs 4 dollars).
The problem is that there are no serious drivers for it.
There are barely any serious drivers for it for Windows so I'm sure that Intel doesn't have any good ones for Apple yet either.
It's a lot easier to wait 'till Intel makes some decent ones and integrate them in Leopard and that's it.
Easier for Intel and easier for Apple. It's a win win for them.
And then there's another thing, people already know that the speed bump to SR is minimum but most people don't know this: although the SR is juuuust a little bit more power consuming when on load than the present Centrinos because it runs at a bit higher speed... it consumes a lot less when not on load because of two main reasons:
The CPU can get downclocked even lower than todays CPUs and can go into deeper sleep levels.
And second, because the motherboard can half it's speed to lower consumption when not in use, something that today's Centrino's motherboards can't do. Today's Centrino's motherboards always work at full speed, and that's something that isn't very power saving, is it.
So that means that for browsing the internet, chatting, watching DVDs, etc were the CPU load is low, the battery use will be lower, and if you add into that the LED display... I'm sure that you'll get a very very decent battery life. Too bad that the LED display is coming late on the MBs.
Why is it ok for the MBPs to have the SR earlier? There aren't any driver problems since MBPs don't use integrated graphics and Apple can justify MB->MBP overprice easily.
And now what a lot of people are waiting for: ==> When is Apple going to construct a MB version that's between MBs and MBPs? I don't need the fancy graphics of the MBPs but I do need a bigger screen than 13". A lower MBP configuration? A larger (not faster) MB version? It would make a lot of our lives easier
thanks for the explanation regarding the drivers. Did not know that.
does anyone know from experience if you don't have to pay the open box fee if exchanged for the newer version?
I bought my MacBook last saturday, been using it, and want to upgrade to the new specs...
does anyone know from experience if you don't have to pay the open box fee if exchanged for the newer version?
Not personal experience, but it has been said several times here and elsewhere that there is a restocking fee. Sorry. Sure someone can confirm first hand.
Haha, that would be sweet. But alas, they'd probably never do that....cause people would be mad if they bought one now and they upgrade to SR in 3 weeks.
Darn....it would be nice to have LED and SR in a macbook in time for the back to school buying season. (or rather, by like July) But it seems that that probably won't be happening now.
Either way my new computer will be freakin' awesome. more than 5 times better than the computer I'm on now in every way.
I agree, mixed feelings my friends. I haven't a clue what to think. Usually Apple times their product updates quite well, but this has no quite well about it.
What's so bad about it's timing?
The Mac Pro recently received 4 additional Cores as a BTO, and WWDC is about 26 Days, 6 Hours, and 25 Minutes away where we should see new hardware.
Sebastian
Surprised about the lack of a santa rosa update...
Oh well.
Yeah that really sucks!!!!
Lets face it this likely means that the coming Mac BooK Pro will be less that what many of us where hoping for. Either that or Apple really wants to differentiate the two machines. The problem is this machine will age real fast technology wise as Apple and other manufactures come out with more Santa Rosa Based machines. Even worst the low end machine got nothing in the way of a GPU boost and frankly it need this more than the CPU boost.
Does make me wonder what Apple has planned. Even more so it make me think that the Mac book "Thin" is more real than I at first thought.
In other words I take this lackluster update as a warning that something else is about to fill in the GPU gap. That is a midrange machine feature wise.
Dave
{/quote]
I'm not sure where you got that idea. In any event Santa Rosa offers the average user a lot over the current chip set.
For examle:
1. improved GPU.
2. greater than 4 GB memory access.
3, improved FSB.
and host of other things.
It is enough of an improvement to make the MacBook a compelling low end machine, worthy of its price. Now we have a stale machine with a bump to the components that will have only minimal impact on the average user. In other words this machine is a joke for anyone looking for value in a low end (but expensive) machine.
2) My *new* black MacBook has a 0.16GHz slower processor, 2x slower SuperDrive and 40GB less capacity than the new black MacBook. Will I be crying over these new release, calling foul on Apple and franticaly claiming my machine is now obsolete? Hell no!
Of course not! There is nothing worst than to listen to some of the whining we hear here when Apple releases a new machine.
That however does not discount that people have legitimate expectations and that is a notebook in Mac Books price range with competitive GPU / chip set hardware. Mind you we are not even talking about a separate GPU, rather just a state of he art integrated chip set. Frankly I would have been happy to see Apple go with an ATI/AMD or Nvidia chip set just to get back in the ball game.
3) With the speed of the MacBok nd MacBook Pros getting this close and the optical drive of the MB being 2x faster than the 15" MBP, it's a safe bet that new Satna Rosa MacBook Pros with this new optical drive and larger HDDs will appear at WWDC in 3 weeks.
Yep! But this release today leads me to feel that the Mac Book Pro won't be breaking much new ground. Further that new Santa Rosa chip set is likely to be coupled with a new discreet GPU with its own memory. In other words even if the coming Mac book Pro is a let down the gap between it and the Mac Book will get much wider.
Even so I have this feeling that the coming Mac Book Pro will be a disappointment. I hope I'm wrong of course but this release of the Mac book did not raise the bar at all.
Dave
Apple will eventually update the MB Pro with Santa Rosa, but even if it does not, it will be not really a disappointment. At this moment, Santa Rosa offers only marginal performance improvements, despite the faster bus, and it would be more relevant in a Macbook update because of the new integrated graphics.
I'd like to know where people get this idea that Santa Rosa is such a mild manner upgrade. Especially when considered in the context of a Mac Book.
In the case of the Mac Book Pro it even has a lot to offer there. Now the integrated CPU is of little use but access to more memory isn't.
Later improvements on the new Intel platform will bring more in performance but for now it is rather marketing than anything else (in the MBP field at least, since the MB would see a substantial graphics boost).
Of course we are discussing a machine that hasn't even been announced yet, but SR for MBP is a must. It might not be much in comparison to Intels coming Hafnium based machines but it certainly is a stop gap measure for at least a year. Remember the P in MBP which is an indication that the MBP are targeted at Pros. What pros often need more than anything else is memory. Considering how close Apples OS update is anything that is not capable of addressing beyond 4 gig bytes of memory shouldn't be considered pro.
It is certain the Apple at this moment prepares the new graphics drivers for the autumn MB update. It needs time and it seems this will come with Leopard.
Apple can't be the caviler with the market. Especially if they want to continue on their gains in sales. If the perception is raised that Aple is again selling outdated and low performance machines sales will tank again just like they did with the G5 and the G4's. The reality is that people no the difference between modestly high priced stuff and modestly high priced crap.
The new MB is now crap, lets hope that Apple doesn't let us down with the coming MBP!!!!
Dave
Thanks for the sympathy.
My first reaction was this: "Motherf*&%(*&^%*&^$#&^*%^$(*&%(&^%)*&@(*&^%!)*&@% *^!%$%*&!_(*&@_(*&%^#@*&^%@*&@%*&^@%$%*!&^(!&^$%(@ *&^@!)(*^%)@*&^@%(&*^@%()*@&^)*!&^%(@&;^)^!(*&%!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
This reaction was very much on the spot in my estimation.
This sucks...I had gotten used to the idea that my wife and I wouldn't have to share computers any more. Maybe in another 5 or 6 years...
ugh!
I think it is about time to simply say screw Apple and look at an alternative from HP or whomever. Immediately dump the MS operating system and install Linux.
I'm with you, in that I'm more than a bit disgusted with Apple and their ability or desire to bounce back and forth with this market manipulation. First they show some willingness to be proactive with the initial MB line even if it resulted in performance that in some ways was far from a MBP. Then the slip back into their old form of offering up grossly expensive outdated machines that seem to ignore the rest of the PC industry.
In this case it is all about the price tag and that price is way to high for outdated hardware.
Dave
I think it is about time to simply say screw Apple and look at an alternative from HP or whomever. Immediately dump the MS operating system and install Linux.
I'm with you, in that I'm more than a bit disgusted with Apple and their ability or desire to bounce back and forth with this market manipulation. First they show some willingness to be proactive with the initial MB line even if it resulted in performance that in some ways was far from a MBP. Then the slip back into their old form of offering up grossly expensive outdated machines that seem to ignore the rest of the PC industry.
lol at "the end is nigh" hysteria in some ppl.
sure, in some respects it is disappointing to just get a bumped MB, but if what Heffeque says is close to the mark, it is completely understandable. would you rather wait til october/leopard for a refreshed MB? if so, next update in c.6months isn't much longer than that.
"apple is teh doom3d!". lol, again.
Last time I checked, Apple's notebook sales had a market share of 10%, up quite a bit and riding on the current MacBook; it seems to be quite a popular machine and is making them money. Why go out on a limb to stretch the boundaries too much when you have something that works well? The MB will not get a chipset before the MBP, so that wasn't even a faint possibility. They brought the MB up to just below the MBP, which only suggests that a MBP update is in the works for the near future.
Apple stocks are also just readjusting to reality... they were climbing too fast, so the drop is a simple readjustment, again, by people outside of Apple who think they know more about the company than the company does itself.
Why go out on a limb to stretch the boundaries too much when you have something that works well?
The MacBook was upgraded to Core 2 Duo processors last November, it was clearly a mistake because the previous Core Duo models had sold very well. Why change? [/sarcasm]
Until now the MacBook was quite competitive and Apple has sold hundreds of thousands each quarter. If they're not kept current it will be more difficult to convince customers. Apple is confident enough to wait another six months, okay, but people won't feel obliged to pretend to like it.
The MB will not get a chipset before the MBP, so that wasn't even a faint possibility. They brought the MB up to just below the MBP, which only suggests that a MBP update is in the works for the near future.
If a revised MBP is in the works for the next future it shouldn't be a problem to update the MacBook with Santa Rosa and the MBP three weeks later. Or Apple could wait for three weeks to revise the two models. This can?t be the reason.
If a revised MBP is in the works for the next future it shouldn't be a problem to update the MacBook with Santa Rosa and the MBP three weeks later. Or Apple could wait for three weeks to revise the two models. This can’t be the reason.
i respectfully disagree. whilst one doesn't want to put too much weight into the postings of any one individual on an internet forum, Heffeque has provided a valid reason why the MB would get only a bump now and MBP could be upgraded to Santa Rosa shortly.
I'd like to know where people get this idea that Santa Rosa is such a mild manner upgrade. Especially when considered in the context of a Mac Book.
You disagree, yet you quote parts of my post that say exactly what you too say: that Santa Rosa is at this point more important for the Macbook. Am I missing something here?
Of course we are discussing a machine that hasn't even been announced yet, but SR for MBP is a must. It might not be much in comparison to Intels coming Hafnium based machines but it certainly is a stop gap measure for at least a year. Remember the P in MBP which is an indication that the MBP are targeted at Pros. What pros often need more than anything else is memory. Considering how close Apples OS update is anything that is not capable of addressing beyond 4 gig bytes of memory shouldn't be considered pro.
And Santa Rosa offers more than 4 GB in the MB Pro how? Remember, it is Santa Rosa, not Santo Spirito.
I will say it again: damn Apple for not meeting my expectations for a super-sub-mini-pocketable notebook that has quad 3GHz cores all for $399. How dare they not meet MY expectations? Shame on Apple. Steve is the Devil!
Nice one Berg.
Apple stocks are also just readjusting to reality... they were climbing too fast, so the drop is a simple readjustment, again, by people outside of Apple who think they know more about the company than the company does itself.
Word. Slight market readjustment. Is good.
I think it is about time to simply say screw Apple and look at an alternative from HP or whomever. Immediately dump the MS operating system and install Linux.
No worries. We'll be waiting when you come running back screaming.
No worries. We'll be waiting when you come running back screaming.
No worries too.