The current $1099 model could probably turn a profit for Apple even if they sold it at $799. If they're just going to knock $100 off it's current price and change nothing else, that's really not good enough.
Probably. And if they wanted to, they could probably design a MB Lite that could cost them even less to build, still be competitive, and sell like hotcakes.
Apple has been making great market share gains, but if budgets are tight and Apple offers no budget models, people may have no choice but to go PC.
OK... well in apple your paying for the fact that they are designed to be silent.. one thing you don't get in many PC's due to the constant fans.. which are a cheaper method of cooling.
Also they are made out of cast aluminum. Thats a huge cost in itself. Thats mainly aesthetics. If you don't want aesthetics then get a cheap PC and shut up.
Also they are made out of cast aluminum. Thats a huge cost in itself. Thats mainly aesthetics. If you don't want aesthetics then get a cheap PC and shut up.
What about those millions of people that buy Macs mainly for the OS and see the nice looks as a nice bonus in stead of the reason to purchase? My Macbook was pretty competively priced when I bought it imo, and they always have been as far as I'm concerned, but if these rumors are true? sheesh... go look at Dell's XPS line, looks like we'll have to pay a $300-ish premium just to have an OSX laptop....
OK... well in apple your paying for the fact that they are designed to be silent.. one thing you don't get in many PC's due to the constant fans.. which are a cheaper method of cooling.
There's a 15" MacBook Pro sitting next to me that's been blowing to beat hell for hours. Silent they are not, and I imagine it'll only get worse with the new thinner models equipped with two graphics cards.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iandean
Also they are made out of cast aluminum. Thats a huge cost in itself. Thats mainly aesthetics. If you don't want aesthetics then get a cheap PC and shut up.
The aluminum really makes them unbearable to keep on your lap. And again, I imagine that'll only get worse with two graphics cards and a thinner case.
Well, the European banks are doing better. We tend to have multi-domain banks where you tend to have more specialized banks. So, we don't have many banks that specialized in getting bankrupted. Likewise, people tend to invest more in "safe" investment than in the stock market. Likewise, we don't live on credits and loans as much as you do. This makes the economy less dynamic, but also more robust in the present times... Different tradeoff.
I know this is off the point but honestly do you not watch the news?
Several European banks are in the shit and have been bailed out by their respective governments.
With just an hour or two to go before we have the facts, I probably should be silent and wait. But I can't. AppleInsider has stated definitively that the new MBP will NOT be offered with an anti-glare screen. If they are correct, this simply sucks. One or two or three people have come on this forum and have diminished (belittled) people who have complained about this. There will always be people who do that with any complaint that anyone has, and you see this sort of thing on every sort of forum that deals with any sort of consumer product, particularly cars and motorcycles. You cannot express a legitimate complaint about anything without some jerk coming along and calling you a whiner. Well, the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of the complaints that most people have with products in general are fully legitimate. Having been a software engineer for the past thirty years of my life, I have spent a good portion of my life sitting in front of a monitor of one sort or another. I have always abhored displays with glossy, reflective surfaces. The suggestion that you should simply move the computer is one of the most patently asinine suggestions that I have ever encountered. There is virtually no environment short of a totally dark room where there will not be a patch of light of some sort on the wall behind you, and if you have a glossy display, you will see a reflection of that patch of light on the screen, and it will be a constant distraction. I am presently using a Sony multi-function 19" LCD display with an anti-glare finish, and if I were using a screen with a glossy surface, I would be seeing the reflection of my kitchen window through the open passage between this room and my kitchen, and this reflection would appear notwithstanding that venetian blinds are closed over that window. There simply is no practical way to eliminate the light behind you, not even by moving the computer, and the suggestion that you can solve the problem simply by moving the computer is asinine.
It also appears that the keyboard will adopt the inordinately inferior keyboard from the MacBook Air. Anyone who thinks that this keyboard is superior to the better-than-average-for-a-notebook keyboard in the present MacBook Pro simply does not have an informed understanding of the criteria by which keyboards should be judged. The MacBook Pro is the only one of the present generation of MacBooks that has a half-decent keyboard, and not even it is in the same class as the keyboards on the Lenovo notebooks. For Apple to have completely abandoned the quality of the keyboard as a requirement for their notebook computers, while focusing so much on the touch pad, is completely incongruous.
So maybe the native screen resolution of the 15" MacBook Pro will be improved. That would be a good thing except for the problem that I have discussed too many times already. But it seems to be a problem that a lot of people don't understand, including most of the people who work for Apple evidently, so I will explain it once more. Much of the text that you see on the screen is presented in a font size that is not readily controllable by the application. Given that there is no way for an application to easily alter the font size used for the text that appears in the parts of the GUI that are common to all applications, the only way that it would be possible for these fonts to be scalable, so that the physical size of the characters is not fully determined by the combination of screen resolution and the screen size, is if the OS provides a way for the user to adjust the scaling used for those fonts. I find it incredulous that the Apple OS does not provide any way for the user to select the scaling for those fonts. The higher the screen resolution relative to the given size of the screen, the greater the quantity of pixels per inch, and the greater the quantity of pixels per inch, the smaller these fonts appear on the screen. The only way around this is to set the effective screen resolution to something other than the native resolution of the screen, and that simply is not an acceptable solution, for obvious reasons.
Apple in recent years has abandoned functionality in favor of sexy designs, and this has simply gone too far. The keyboard that Apple started selling when the present iMac was introduced is quite simply one of the very worst keyboards that I've ever seen. Apple's strategy of catering to the lowest common denominator has gone too far. A useful analogy is the approach that is typical with Japanese car manufacturers, where instead of getting long list of options, you get a couple or three packages that were deemed by the marketing people of the manufacturer to be the combinations of options that satisfy the preferences of the majority of buyers. Apple designs their computers to satisfy what they perceive to be the preferences of the typical user, and to hell with the preferences of anyone who does not fall under the heading of "typical user". The typical user is content with a glossy screen, so all that anyone gets is a glossy screen. The typical user is content with a crappy keyboard, so all that anyone gets is a crappy keyboard. This trend, whereby Apple concerns themselves only with features that are likely to matter to a strong majority of users, has become increasingly pronounced over the years. No way, no how does this new 15" MacBook Pro deserve the moniker of "Pro".
If you sense frustration and aggravation, you would be correct. It was perhaps a year ago that I started looking for a new computer, having grown disgusted with Microsoft's horrendously awful operating system. Being an old UNIX guy, I naturally was drawn to the new Apple computers now that their OS is a UNIX derivation. But within the first few minutes of experimenting with the GUI in the store, I realized that there were several very significant shortcomings, the most notable being the problem with the system fonts not being scalable. I started to consider buying a Lenovo and installing Linux on it, but I decided not to do that and to wait and see if Apple would solve the problem with the system fonts not being scalable. Instead of addressing that problem, what I am now looking at is the 15" MacBook Pro that I wanted to buy having been replaced by a computer that seems to be overtly inferior.
Sigh. Why did Apple decide to replace the excellent MacBook Pro with something that looks to be a cheap knock-off of its former self? I'm betting that in the next two weeks, Apple will sell more of the present MacBook Pro than this replacement, and that the inventory of the present model will run dry within a few weeks. Anyone who wants one had better not wait too long or there won't be any left.
So the pictures of the bottom answer the question of the "mystery ports" on the side. There are no ports. The battery is under a cover, so the little round hole is the button you press to see how much battery you have left without turning the machine on (currently on the battery). The thing under the tape in the leaked photo is probably a set of laser-cut holes like on the apple bluetooth keyboard, that are invisible until the LED underneath them lights up.
Some really great products were released today. Unfortunately I also see lost sales because of them. In this economy an extra $200 for a more premium Macbook or an extra $300 to have a LCD 24". There's also the issue of having to pay an extra $30 to hook your new MBP to a displayer other than the new 24"
It is basically what happened. Apple fianlly replaced the 12" Powerbook today and left the iBook/Macbook line to the same state of neglect as the mini.
It is basically what happened. Apple fianlly replaced the 12" Powerbook today and left the iBook/Macbook line to the same state of neglect as the mini.
That's not really so. Even the alluminium MacBook has only GeForce 9400M compared to 9400M + additional 9600M GT. Therefore it's not a 13" MBP, it's still a consumer-grade notebook, just sleeker and more robust. I'm sure at some point the plastic version will be phased out.
That's not really so. Even the alluminium MacBook has only GeForce 9400M compared to 9400M + additional 9600M GT. Therefore it's not a 13" MBP, it's still a consumer-grade notebook, just sleeker and more robust. I'm sure at some point the plastic version will be phased out.
If they phase out the plastic one and don't drop the price of the new MacBook to the $1000 price point, they'll also phase out their sales to the incoming college crowd.
If they phase out the plastic one and don't drop the price of the new MacBook to the $1000 price point, they'll also phase out their sales to the incoming college crowd.
I'm sure they'll drop it. I agree that they need to keep some notebook at $1K level. What I think will happen is that they will add some bonus to MacBook line (e.g. SSD or faster CPU) and drop one of the current ones to $1000 level. Jobs likes consitency in Apple's product line. So far 17" MBP and plastic MB stand out. I think those will be dropped. Maybe even at MacWorld.
Comments
The current $1099 model could probably turn a profit for Apple even if they sold it at $799. If they're just going to knock $100 off it's current price and change nothing else, that's really not good enough.
Probably. And if they wanted to, they could probably design a MB Lite that could cost them even less to build, still be competitive, and sell like hotcakes.
Apple has been making great market share gains, but if budgets are tight and Apple offers no budget models, people may have no choice but to go PC.
Also they are made out of cast aluminum. Thats a huge cost in itself. Thats mainly aesthetics. If you don't want aesthetics then get a cheap PC and shut up.
Also they are made out of cast aluminum. Thats a huge cost in itself. Thats mainly aesthetics. If you don't want aesthetics then get a cheap PC and shut up.
What about those millions of people that buy Macs mainly for the OS and see the nice looks as a nice bonus in stead of the reason to purchase? My Macbook was pretty competively priced when I bought it imo, and they always have been as far as I'm concerned, but if these rumors are true? sheesh... go look at Dell's XPS line, looks like we'll have to pay a $300-ish premium just to have an OSX laptop....
I don't need bright, vivid color. I need accurate color. And, especially, accurate color devoid of as much ambient influence as possible.
I say this without a single moment of hesitation – as an image professional, the glossy screen is a deal-breaker.
Say it ain't so.
OK... well in apple your paying for the fact that they are designed to be silent.. one thing you don't get in many PC's due to the constant fans.. which are a cheaper method of cooling.
There's a 15" MacBook Pro sitting next to me that's been blowing to beat hell for hours. Silent they are not, and I imagine it'll only get worse with the new thinner models equipped with two graphics cards.
Also they are made out of cast aluminum. Thats a huge cost in itself. Thats mainly aesthetics. If you don't want aesthetics then get a cheap PC and shut up.
The aluminum really makes them unbearable to keep on your lap. And again, I imagine that'll only get worse with two graphics cards and a thinner case.
Well, the European banks are doing better. We tend to have multi-domain banks where you tend to have more specialized banks. So, we don't have many banks that specialized in getting bankrupted. Likewise, people tend to invest more in "safe" investment than in the stock market. Likewise, we don't live on credits and loans as much as you do. This makes the economy less dynamic, but also more robust in the present times... Different tradeoff.
I know this is off the point but honestly do you not watch the news?
Several European banks are in the shit and have been bailed out by their respective governments.
It also appears that the keyboard will adopt the inordinately inferior keyboard from the MacBook Air. Anyone who thinks that this keyboard is superior to the better-than-average-for-a-notebook keyboard in the present MacBook Pro simply does not have an informed understanding of the criteria by which keyboards should be judged. The MacBook Pro is the only one of the present generation of MacBooks that has a half-decent keyboard, and not even it is in the same class as the keyboards on the Lenovo notebooks. For Apple to have completely abandoned the quality of the keyboard as a requirement for their notebook computers, while focusing so much on the touch pad, is completely incongruous.
So maybe the native screen resolution of the 15" MacBook Pro will be improved. That would be a good thing except for the problem that I have discussed too many times already. But it seems to be a problem that a lot of people don't understand, including most of the people who work for Apple evidently, so I will explain it once more. Much of the text that you see on the screen is presented in a font size that is not readily controllable by the application. Given that there is no way for an application to easily alter the font size used for the text that appears in the parts of the GUI that are common to all applications, the only way that it would be possible for these fonts to be scalable, so that the physical size of the characters is not fully determined by the combination of screen resolution and the screen size, is if the OS provides a way for the user to adjust the scaling used for those fonts. I find it incredulous that the Apple OS does not provide any way for the user to select the scaling for those fonts. The higher the screen resolution relative to the given size of the screen, the greater the quantity of pixels per inch, and the greater the quantity of pixels per inch, the smaller these fonts appear on the screen. The only way around this is to set the effective screen resolution to something other than the native resolution of the screen, and that simply is not an acceptable solution, for obvious reasons.
Apple in recent years has abandoned functionality in favor of sexy designs, and this has simply gone too far. The keyboard that Apple started selling when the present iMac was introduced is quite simply one of the very worst keyboards that I've ever seen. Apple's strategy of catering to the lowest common denominator has gone too far. A useful analogy is the approach that is typical with Japanese car manufacturers, where instead of getting long list of options, you get a couple or three packages that were deemed by the marketing people of the manufacturer to be the combinations of options that satisfy the preferences of the majority of buyers. Apple designs their computers to satisfy what they perceive to be the preferences of the typical user, and to hell with the preferences of anyone who does not fall under the heading of "typical user". The typical user is content with a glossy screen, so all that anyone gets is a glossy screen. The typical user is content with a crappy keyboard, so all that anyone gets is a crappy keyboard. This trend, whereby Apple concerns themselves only with features that are likely to matter to a strong majority of users, has become increasingly pronounced over the years. No way, no how does this new 15" MacBook Pro deserve the moniker of "Pro".
If you sense frustration and aggravation, you would be correct. It was perhaps a year ago that I started looking for a new computer, having grown disgusted with Microsoft's horrendously awful operating system. Being an old UNIX guy, I naturally was drawn to the new Apple computers now that their OS is a UNIX derivation. But within the first few minutes of experimenting with the GUI in the store, I realized that there were several very significant shortcomings, the most notable being the problem with the system fonts not being scalable. I started to consider buying a Lenovo and installing Linux on it, but I decided not to do that and to wait and see if Apple would solve the problem with the system fonts not being scalable. Instead of addressing that problem, what I am now looking at is the 15" MacBook Pro that I wanted to buy having been replaced by a computer that seems to be overtly inferior.
Sigh. Why did Apple decide to replace the excellent MacBook Pro with something that looks to be a cheap knock-off of its former self? I'm betting that in the next two weeks, Apple will sell more of the present MacBook Pro than this replacement, and that the inventory of the present model will run dry within a few weeks. Anyone who wants one had better not wait too long or there won't be any left.
Is it possible that the new casing design would allow user-replaceable hard drives? That would be a good bonus.
Also, is there any information about any weight changes?
What have I told you? - I knew they would solve that problem eventually.
I'm fine with them keeping the plastic model for the cheapest one, but $999 isn't NEARLY good enough, especially in this economy.
They put all their effort into improving the high end, which is going to be the segment hit the hardest by the economy.
Really dumb, apple.
has anyone thought that maybe the $999 MacBook might actually be the only MacBook and the $1299 and 1499 might be 13inch MacBook Pros?
that's sort of what it is.
that's sort of what it is.
It is basically what happened. Apple fianlly replaced the 12" Powerbook today and left the iBook/Macbook line to the same state of neglect as the mini.
It is basically what happened. Apple fianlly replaced the 12" Powerbook today and left the iBook/Macbook line to the same state of neglect as the mini.
That's not really so. Even the alluminium MacBook has only GeForce 9400M compared to 9400M + additional 9600M GT. Therefore it's not a 13" MBP, it's still a consumer-grade notebook, just sleeker and more robust. I'm sure at some point the plastic version will be phased out.
That's not really so. Even the alluminium MacBook has only GeForce 9400M compared to 9400M + additional 9600M GT. Therefore it's not a 13" MBP, it's still a consumer-grade notebook, just sleeker and more robust. I'm sure at some point the plastic version will be phased out.
If they phase out the plastic one and don't drop the price of the new MacBook to the $1000 price point, they'll also phase out their sales to the incoming college crowd.
Down here in New Zealand Apple have announced the following prices
Macbook Pro 2.3Ghz (256 Gfx) - $3699 (NZ) in U.S $2,292.35 USD
Macbook Pro 2.53 Ghz (512 GFX) - $4599(NZ) in U.S $2850 USD
Not so good.
If they phase out the plastic one and don't drop the price of the new MacBook to the $1000 price point, they'll also phase out their sales to the incoming college crowd.
I'm sure they'll drop it. I agree that they need to keep some notebook at $1K level. What I think will happen is that they will add some bonus to MacBook line (e.g. SSD or faster CPU) and drop one of the current ones to $1000 level. Jobs likes consitency in Apple's product line. So far 17" MBP and plastic MB stand out. I think those will be dropped. Maybe even at MacWorld.