At least you are enthusiastic about it, but there are other things to consider. You seem to think Apple will just ho-hum throw the chips in and that's it there's the upgrade. However, there are other things to consider. Blu-ray, for example, and the associated licensing. Apple will be more expensive than HP or Dell because of the Aluminum enclosures, for one. They also have illuminated keyboards, for two. If HP's 15" is $1700, I don't need Google to tell me Apple's will be more money.
HP's isn't running any operating system you want, with a 7 hour battery and the best hand gesture trackpad on the market in a laptop.
If HP releases for $1700-$1800 as you claim, Apple's prices will go up. They will blame it on the Blu-Ray and won't cry about lost sales in the papers, either.
For someone who loves to compare tech and Google stuff, start with business and marketing to learn why Apple can raise their prices and get away with it.
Wow. Do I really have to repeat myself?:
If the new MID-RANGE Clarksfield i7 quad-core sells for about the same as a Core 2 Duo in the current 15-inch MBP, why would Apple suddenly raise the price of the MBP from $1699 to $2799??? Think about it.
I'm not talking about blue-ray or the other features in the HP... I'm just saying, if the new mid-range Clarksfield chip costs as much as the current Core 2 Duo chip, the current price of the MacBook Pro ($1699) should stay the same. The two chips cost the same... get it?
If the new MID-RANGE Clarksfield i7 quad-core sells for about the same as a Core 2 Duo in the current 15-inch MBP, why would Apple suddenly raise the price of the MBP from $1699 to $2799??? Think about it.
I'm not talking about blue-ray or the other features in the HP... I'm just saying, if the new mid-range Clarksfield chip costs as much as the current Core 2 Duo chip, the current price of the MacBook Pro ($1699) should stay the same. The two chips cost the same... get it?
I was actually hoping you wouldn't even comment again, let alone repeat yourself. And since you cannot or will not read what I wrote above, I'll do my best to explain something. Even though I shouldn't because you are a smart ass.
What I'm saying is, Apple will not just switch the chips and call it a day, same price notebook, no other features in my opinion. Apple DOES NOT include Blu-ray at the moment, and when they add it it will cause the price of their laptops to increase. They most likely will pass this hit to consumers, because they are already experiencing a drop in their bottom line with this lineup.
Another thing is, do the associated components have a higher price point, ie, the board, socket, ram etc? Just because the chip is the same price point, I have trouble believing giving people 6GB's of faster RAM and such will remain the same price.
I was actually hoping you wouldn't even comment again, let alone repeat yourself. And since you cannot or will not read what I wrote above, I'll so my best to explain something. Even though I shouldn't because you are a smart ass.
What I'm saying is, Apple will not just switch the chips and call it a day, same price notebook, no other features in my opinion. Apple DOES NOT include Blu-ray at the moment, and when they add it it will cause the price of their laptops to increase. They most likely will pass this hit to consumers, because they are already experiencing a drop in their bottom line with this lineup.
Geez. I'm NOT talking about Blu-ray... I don't want Blu-ray... never wanted Blu-ray... could care less if the HP has Blu-ray... even Steve Jobs doesn't want Blu-ray. What I'm saying is...
If HP can make an i7 Clarksfield quad-core notebook... than so can Apple, particularly when Apple DOESN'T put Blu-ray players in their notebooks, and when the chip in discussion (the whole point of this thread!) costs as much as the chips Apple currently uses.
If the new MID-RANGE Clarksfield i7 quad-core sells for about the same as a Core 2 Duo in the current 15-inch MBP, why would Apple suddenly raise the price of the MBP from $1699 to $2799???
Oh, and which Core2Duo? The mid-range Core2Duo is $1999 at the moment. Also, the 2.8Ghz is $2299. There are a lot of things you just assume people know that you thought them. Please elaborate on what you think might be affected by a switch from 2 to 4 cores, if anything at all, including price.
I'm really hoping to learn something about these new chips, the whole eliminating the FSB, and all that. I am, admittedly, a little behind on my technology,
Oh, and which Core2Duo? The mid-range Core2Duo is $1999 at the moment. Also, the 2.8Ghz is $2299. There are a lot of things you just assume people know that you thought them. Please elaborate on what you think might be affected by a switch from 2 to 4 cores, if anything at all, including price.
I'm really hoping to learn something about these new chips, the whole eliminating the FSB, and all that. I am, admittedly, a little behind on my technology,
Wow... you need to wake up and realize we're talking about the price of CHIPS and subsequent relative price to Apples current MBP ($1699).
Go back and read the original article about the mid-range Clarksfield... "$546 for i7-820QM" (which is about the SAME price as the CURRENT Core 2 Duo CHIPS, in the CURRENT MBP). But if you really want to, you can google it too.
Wow... you need to wake up and realize we're talking about the price of CHIPS and subsequent relative price to Apples current MBP ($1699).
Go back and read the original article about the mid-range Clarksfield... "$546 for i7-820QM" (which is about the SAME price as the CURRENT Core 2 Duo CHIPS, in the CURRENT MBP). But if you really want to, you can google it too.
So much for civilized discussion. The article might have been about the price of the new chip, but our discussion was about why I said the notebooks would increase. You just want to hear yourself type I guess. I don't need to wake up honestly, I'm fully functioning at the moment. You are just a teenager looking to see how many posts you can get and how many people you can scoff at. Not worth any further comments, honestly.
I wish that Apple would release a thicker iMac with a desktop Quad, but Apple has always used laptop chips in the iMacs even though the prices are higher than desktop counterparts and performance slower (voltages and power consumption much lower though, but this isn't a major issue with a thicker iMac case).
So much for civilized discussion. The article might have been about the price of the new chip, but our discussion was about why I said the notebooks would increase. You just want to hear yourself type I guess. I don't need to wake up honestly, I'm fully functioning at the moment. You are just a teenager looking to see how many posts you can get and how many people you can scoff at. Not worth any further comments, honestly.
Actually, I'm an adult with a university degree... furthermore, I should have clued in when you mentioned the MBP at $1999 & $2299... you're quoting Canadian prices!
I've been quoting US prices all along (ie, MBP for $1699, not $1999). I'm Canadian myself, but I compare everything in US prices, because that's the currency of the Clarksfield chips mentioned at the top of the page, as well as the Clarksfield equipped HP's I've been talking about. Ironically, you gotta compare apples to apples ( US$ to US$), and I think my posts will make a lot more sense now if you go back and read them again
I wish that Apple would release a thicker iMac with a desktop Quad, but Apple has always used laptop chips in the iMacs even though the prices are higher than desktop counterparts and performance slower (voltages and power consumption much lower though, but this isn't a major issue with a thicker iMac case).
Many people would love that, I'm sure. I'm still looking for a MDD replacement, and we all know by now I'm never gonna see it
Actually, I'm an adult with a university degree... furthermore, I should have clued in when you mentioned the MBP at $1999 & $2299... you're quoting Canadian prices!
I've been quoting US prices all along (ie, MBP for $1699, not $1999). I'm Canadian myself, but I compare everything in US prices, because that's the currency of the Clarksfield chips mentioned at the top of the page, as well as the Clarksfield equipped HP's I've been talking about. Ironically, you gotta compare apples to apples ( US$ to US$), and I think my posts will make a lot more sense now if you go back and read them again
I don't know, I thought I was looking at the US store. I tried again, and it seems I see 6 MBP's, three of which are 15". They are $1699, $1999, and $2299 respectively.
Perhaps a summary of my thoughts is in order, one last time.
The price of the chip, while very similarly priced to the current Core2Duo, will require other options and technologies in relation to a new lineup of notebook offerings from Apple. This new offering will cost more due to those factors, setting aside the fact that the chip itself will not cost Apple much more, if at all.
Ummm... HP is making it... so it will exist. Need I say more?
Again, if HP can do it, so can Apple.
The Envy is 2.5mm thicker than the 15" MBP, and while this might seem insignificant, when we're dealing with already ridiculously thin notebooks, that 2.5mm is quite a bit. With that extra space, HP could use substantially better and cooling with larger fans. I'm not so sure that Apple CAN put a Clarksfield in the 15" MBP and have it run at stock speeds without cooling issues.
The 1.6 Quad's 45W TDP versus the T9000's 35W is a notable difference.
The Envy is 2.5mm thicker than the 15" MBP, and while this might seem insignificant, when we're dealing with already ridiculously thin notebooks, that 2.5mm is quite a bit. With that extra space, HP could use substantially better and cooling with larger fans. I'm not so sure that Apple CAN put a Clarksfield in the 15" MBP and have it run at stock speeds without cooling issues.
The 1.6 Quad's 45W TDP versus the T9000's 35W is a notable difference.
Perhaps they can make them out of carbon fiber and thin the walls of the unibody enclosure.
I sincerely doubt that they'll have a media event to trot out the new iMac. It's just not big enough to justify its own event. We'll wake up one day soon to find the news splashed across apple.com, that's all.
I think it depends on how much of a redesign, how much performance improvement there is. If it's
minor, you're probably right. If it's more significant, and includes the MacBook and iMacs, then they a media event is more likely. Then again, I'm expecting one on the basis of SJ's, "See you again soon," comment at the end of the iPod media event.
I don't know, I thought I was looking at the US store. I tried again, and it seems I see 6 MBP's, three of which are 15". They are $1699, $1999, and $2299 respectively.
Perhaps a summary of my thoughts is in order, one last time.
The price of the chip, while very similarly priced to the current Core2Duo, will require other options and technologies in relation to a new lineup of notebook offerings from Apple. This new offering will cost more due to those factors, setting aside the fact that the chip itself will not cost Apple much more, if at all.
Yes... there are 6 "MacBook Pro" models, and the mid-range is a 15" which sells for $1699... and the two chips in discussion are very similar in price, which I've been saying all along.
Though you need to read up on the i7... it has an integrated memory controller in the chip now, which requires less "tech" in the notebook. And the people who keep saying it's too hot for the MBP aren't realizing that it makes up for it by reducing the total TDP by getting rid of the hot memory controller that sits outside of the chip in Core 2 Duo notebooks.
Not to mention, when Apple releases new products, they tend to offer more performance at the same price or less (than their previous models). A quad-core is the next logical step for increasing performance, seeing as how Core 2 Duo's have plateaued... and these new i7's are really affordable.
I wish that Apple would release a thicker iMac with a desktop Quad, but Apple has always used laptop chips in the iMacs even though the prices are higher than desktop counterparts and performance slower (voltages and power consumption much lower though, but this isn't a major issue with a thicker iMac case).
Careful, sir; you're treading on gospel here. Thicker is not the Apple way.
Although I do agree: Would it really hurt Apple to (!!gasp!!) go a couple mm's thicker so the iMac could handle a cheaper & faster desktop chip?
Or is this just about keeping the iMac from cannibalizing the Mac Pro?
If the new MID-RANGE Clarksfield i7 quad-core sells for about the same as a Core 2 Duo in the current 15-inch MBP, why would Apple suddenly raise the price of the MBP from $1699 to $2799??? Think about it.
Because they'll need a battery from the 27th Century to make it last more than 10 mins.
Check out the battery life of these processors... start at Anandtech.
That's at idle... 69 minutes! Even with Apple's super-duper batteries, you're looking at less than 1.5 hours battery life if you just stare at the screen and don't do anything.
Yes... there are 6 "MacBook Pro" models, and the mid-range is a 15" which sells for $1699... and the two chips in discussion are very similar in price, which I've been saying all along.
I was only considering 15" MBP's, where the $1999 would be the middle ground. Doesn't matter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CdnBook
Though you need to read up on the i7... it has an integrated memory controller in the chip now, which requires less "tech" in the notebook. And the people who keep saying it's too hot for the MBP aren't realizing that it makes up for it by reducing the total TDP by getting rid of the hot memory controller that sits outside of the chip in Core 2 Duo notebooks.
Actually, I was playing Intel's online game this morning They are impressive....poor AMD.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CdnBook
Not to mention, when Apple releases new products, they tend to offer more performance at the same price or less (than their previous models). A quad-core is the next logical step for increasing performance, seeing as how Core 2 Duo's have plateaued... and these new i7's are really affordable.
I don't refute that, other than this particular sequence of upgrades. As I've said many times in this thread, which you steadfastly disagree with or completely want to ignore, is that Apple needs to add some things that their competitors have had or will be shortly releasing. These additions are going to bring productions costs up for their lineup. It was already pointed out in either the Q conference call or the end Q report, can't remember where exactly. Apple basically told everyone to expect lower earnings per unit due to these factors, and at that point they dropped the price of their line. It used to be higher actually, before the unibody. These prices are what people were paying for the 2.4Ghz Santa Rosa's on educator's discounts, if I remember right.
However, when Apple (if?) decides to finally add Blu-Ray and i7 chips, I don't think the consumer will be paying these low prices. Especially given that HP is putting out something with all the pizazz, and at $1700. It just doesn't compute that Apple will have better technology (read: batteries, enclosures) and yet cost LESS than HP's offering. If you prove to be correct Cdn, believe me that would be awesome. I just don't think so.
Because they'll need a battery from the 27th Century to make it last more than 10 mins.
Check out the battery life of these processors... start at Anandtech.
That's at idle... 69 minutes! Even with Apple's super-duper batteries, you're looking at less than 1.5 hours battery life if you just stare at the screen and don't do anything.
lol... by a 2Ghz "idle", they mean not turbo'd up to 3+Ghz. When all four cores are maxed out, the chip "idles" the clock speed back to 2Ghz. That's when it's maxed out at full load on all four cores. In actuality, the Clarksfield is far more energy efficient because it can run one core (two threads with hyperthreading), and cut power off to the other 3 cores... lasting for hours. The Clarksfield is a mobile chip people... read about it.
Though you need to read up on the i7... it has an integrated memory controller in the chip now, which requires less "tech" in the notebook.
It's very odd that this has not translated to the price of Motherboards in the desktop arena. i7 Mobos are still seriously expensive. The cheapest are over $200, and that's on a site like NewEgg. A good one will $400. OK, there are one or two that just sneak in under $200, but they're laggy latency crap. Phenom II Mobos or even Core Dup Mobos are less than half that amount.
Now obviously mobile solutions are a bit different, but your point about the 'external tech. being cheaper because there is more 'inside the chip' is untrue.
lol... by a 2Ghz "idle", they mean not turbo'd up to 3+Ghz. When all four cores are maxed out, the chip "idles" the clock speed back to 2Ghz. That's when it's maxed out at full load on all four cores. In actuality, the Clarksfield is far more energy efficient because it can run one core (two threads with hyperthreading), and cut power off to the other 3 cores... lasting for hours. The Clarksfield is a mobile chip people... read about it.
I know what they mean...
The battery life posted is the BEST case scenario. When using simple single threaded tasks like web surfing (which doesn't require 4 cores, or even 3ghz) it's even worse than the 69 minutes. The 2ghz in brackets is the CPU model, not the speed it's running during the entire test. My MacBook CD 2ghz CPU is, right now, running at 998mhz, not 2ghz for example.
CPU throttling has been around since 'Cool 'n Quiet' (AMD). Perhaps even before then.
Comments
At least you are enthusiastic about it, but there are other things to consider. You seem to think Apple will just ho-hum throw the chips in and that's it there's the upgrade. However, there are other things to consider. Blu-ray, for example, and the associated licensing. Apple will be more expensive than HP or Dell because of the Aluminum enclosures, for one. They also have illuminated keyboards, for two. If HP's 15" is $1700, I don't need Google to tell me Apple's will be more money.
HP's isn't running any operating system you want, with a 7 hour battery and the best hand gesture trackpad on the market in a laptop.
If HP releases for $1700-$1800 as you claim, Apple's prices will go up. They will blame it on the Blu-Ray and won't cry about lost sales in the papers, either.
For someone who loves to compare tech and Google stuff, start with business and marketing to learn why Apple can raise their prices and get away with it.
Wow. Do I really have to repeat myself?:
If the new MID-RANGE Clarksfield i7 quad-core sells for about the same as a Core 2 Duo in the current 15-inch MBP, why would Apple suddenly raise the price of the MBP from $1699 to $2799??? Think about it.
I'm not talking about blue-ray or the other features in the HP... I'm just saying, if the new mid-range Clarksfield chip costs as much as the current Core 2 Duo chip, the current price of the MacBook Pro ($1699) should stay the same. The two chips cost the same... get it?
Wow. Do I really have to repeat myself?:
If the new MID-RANGE Clarksfield i7 quad-core sells for about the same as a Core 2 Duo in the current 15-inch MBP, why would Apple suddenly raise the price of the MBP from $1699 to $2799??? Think about it.
I'm not talking about blue-ray or the other features in the HP... I'm just saying, if the new mid-range Clarksfield chip costs as much as the current Core 2 Duo chip, the current price of the MacBook Pro ($1699) should stay the same. The two chips cost the same... get it?
I was actually hoping you wouldn't even comment again, let alone repeat yourself. And since you cannot or will not read what I wrote above, I'll do my best to explain something. Even though I shouldn't because you are a smart ass.
What I'm saying is, Apple will not just switch the chips and call it a day, same price notebook, no other features in my opinion. Apple DOES NOT include Blu-ray at the moment, and when they add it it will cause the price of their laptops to increase. They most likely will pass this hit to consumers, because they are already experiencing a drop in their bottom line with this lineup.
Another thing is, do the associated components have a higher price point, ie, the board, socket, ram etc? Just because the chip is the same price point, I have trouble believing giving people 6GB's of faster RAM and such will remain the same price.
I was actually hoping you wouldn't even comment again, let alone repeat yourself. And since you cannot or will not read what I wrote above, I'll so my best to explain something. Even though I shouldn't because you are a smart ass.
What I'm saying is, Apple will not just switch the chips and call it a day, same price notebook, no other features in my opinion. Apple DOES NOT include Blu-ray at the moment, and when they add it it will cause the price of their laptops to increase. They most likely will pass this hit to consumers, because they are already experiencing a drop in their bottom line with this lineup.
Geez. I'm NOT talking about Blu-ray... I don't want Blu-ray... never wanted Blu-ray... could care less if the HP has Blu-ray... even Steve Jobs doesn't want Blu-ray. What I'm saying is...
If HP can make an i7 Clarksfield quad-core notebook... than so can Apple, particularly when Apple DOESN'T put Blu-ray players in their notebooks, and when the chip in discussion (the whole point of this thread!) costs as much as the chips Apple currently uses.
Wow. Do I really have to repeat myself?:
If the new MID-RANGE Clarksfield i7 quad-core sells for about the same as a Core 2 Duo in the current 15-inch MBP, why would Apple suddenly raise the price of the MBP from $1699 to $2799???
Oh, and which Core2Duo? The mid-range Core2Duo is $1999 at the moment. Also, the 2.8Ghz is $2299. There are a lot of things you just assume people know that you thought them. Please elaborate on what you think might be affected by a switch from 2 to 4 cores, if anything at all, including price.
I'm really hoping to learn something about these new chips, the whole eliminating the FSB, and all that. I am, admittedly, a little behind on my technology,
Oh, and which Core2Duo? The mid-range Core2Duo is $1999 at the moment. Also, the 2.8Ghz is $2299. There are a lot of things you just assume people know that you thought them. Please elaborate on what you think might be affected by a switch from 2 to 4 cores, if anything at all, including price.
I'm really hoping to learn something about these new chips, the whole eliminating the FSB, and all that. I am, admittedly, a little behind on my technology,
Wow... you need to wake up and realize we're talking about the price of CHIPS and subsequent relative price to Apples current MBP ($1699).
Go back and read the original article about the mid-range Clarksfield... "$546 for i7-820QM" (which is about the SAME price as the CURRENT Core 2 Duo CHIPS, in the CURRENT MBP). But if you really want to, you can google it too.
Wow... you need to wake up and realize we're talking about the price of CHIPS and subsequent relative price to Apples current MBP ($1699).
Go back and read the original article about the mid-range Clarksfield... "$546 for i7-820QM" (which is about the SAME price as the CURRENT Core 2 Duo CHIPS, in the CURRENT MBP). But if you really want to, you can google it too.
So much for civilized discussion. The article might have been about the price of the new chip, but our discussion was about why I said the notebooks would increase. You just want to hear yourself type I guess. I don't need to wake up honestly, I'm fully functioning at the moment. You are just a teenager looking to see how many posts you can get and how many people you can scoff at. Not worth any further comments, honestly.
So much for civilized discussion. The article might have been about the price of the new chip, but our discussion was about why I said the notebooks would increase. You just want to hear yourself type I guess. I don't need to wake up honestly, I'm fully functioning at the moment. You are just a teenager looking to see how many posts you can get and how many people you can scoff at. Not worth any further comments, honestly.
Actually, I'm an adult with a university degree... furthermore, I should have clued in when you mentioned the MBP at $1999 & $2299... you're quoting Canadian prices!
I've been quoting US prices all along (ie, MBP for $1699, not $1999). I'm Canadian myself, but I compare everything in US prices, because that's the currency of the Clarksfield chips mentioned at the top of the page, as well as the Clarksfield equipped HP's I've been talking about. Ironically, you gotta compare apples to apples ( US$ to US$), and I think my posts will make a lot more sense now if you go back and read them again
I wish that Apple would release a thicker iMac with a desktop Quad, but Apple has always used laptop chips in the iMacs even though the prices are higher than desktop counterparts and performance slower (voltages and power consumption much lower though, but this isn't a major issue with a thicker iMac case).
Many people would love that, I'm sure. I'm still looking for a MDD replacement, and we all know by now I'm never gonna see it
Actually, I'm an adult with a university degree... furthermore, I should have clued in when you mentioned the MBP at $1999 & $2299... you're quoting Canadian prices!
I've been quoting US prices all along (ie, MBP for $1699, not $1999). I'm Canadian myself, but I compare everything in US prices, because that's the currency of the Clarksfield chips mentioned at the top of the page, as well as the Clarksfield equipped HP's I've been talking about. Ironically, you gotta compare apples to apples ( US$ to US$), and I think my posts will make a lot more sense now if you go back and read them again
I don't know, I thought I was looking at the US store. I tried again, and it seems I see 6 MBP's, three of which are 15". They are $1699, $1999, and $2299 respectively.
Perhaps a summary of my thoughts is in order, one last time.
The price of the chip, while very similarly priced to the current Core2Duo, will require other options and technologies in relation to a new lineup of notebook offerings from Apple. This new offering will cost more due to those factors, setting aside the fact that the chip itself will not cost Apple much more, if at all.
Thank you for that insightful bit of wisdom
Ummm... HP is making it... so it will exist. Need I say more?
Again, if HP can do it, so can Apple.
The Envy is 2.5mm thicker than the 15" MBP, and while this might seem insignificant, when we're dealing with already ridiculously thin notebooks, that 2.5mm is quite a bit. With that extra space, HP could use substantially better and cooling with larger fans. I'm not so sure that Apple CAN put a Clarksfield in the 15" MBP and have it run at stock speeds without cooling issues.
The 1.6 Quad's 45W TDP versus the T9000's 35W is a notable difference.
The Envy is 2.5mm thicker than the 15" MBP, and while this might seem insignificant, when we're dealing with already ridiculously thin notebooks, that 2.5mm is quite a bit. With that extra space, HP could use substantially better and cooling with larger fans. I'm not so sure that Apple CAN put a Clarksfield in the 15" MBP and have it run at stock speeds without cooling issues.
The 1.6 Quad's 45W TDP versus the T9000's 35W is a notable difference.
Perhaps they can make them out of carbon fiber and thin the walls of the unibody enclosure.
I sincerely doubt that they'll have a media event to trot out the new iMac. It's just not big enough to justify its own event. We'll wake up one day soon to find the news splashed across apple.com, that's all.
I think it depends on how much of a redesign, how much performance improvement there is. If it's
minor, you're probably right. If it's more significant, and includes the MacBook and iMacs, then they a media event is more likely. Then again, I'm expecting one on the basis of SJ's, "See you again soon," comment at the end of the iPod media event.
I don't know, I thought I was looking at the US store. I tried again, and it seems I see 6 MBP's, three of which are 15". They are $1699, $1999, and $2299 respectively.
Perhaps a summary of my thoughts is in order, one last time.
The price of the chip, while very similarly priced to the current Core2Duo, will require other options and technologies in relation to a new lineup of notebook offerings from Apple. This new offering will cost more due to those factors, setting aside the fact that the chip itself will not cost Apple much more, if at all.
Yes... there are 6 "MacBook Pro" models, and the mid-range is a 15" which sells for $1699... and the two chips in discussion are very similar in price, which I've been saying all along.
Though you need to read up on the i7... it has an integrated memory controller in the chip now, which requires less "tech" in the notebook. And the people who keep saying it's too hot for the MBP aren't realizing that it makes up for it by reducing the total TDP by getting rid of the hot memory controller that sits outside of the chip in Core 2 Duo notebooks.
Not to mention, when Apple releases new products, they tend to offer more performance at the same price or less (than their previous models). A quad-core is the next logical step for increasing performance, seeing as how Core 2 Duo's have plateaued... and these new i7's are really affordable.
I wish that Apple would release a thicker iMac with a desktop Quad, but Apple has always used laptop chips in the iMacs even though the prices are higher than desktop counterparts and performance slower (voltages and power consumption much lower though, but this isn't a major issue with a thicker iMac case).
Careful, sir; you're treading on gospel here. Thicker is not the Apple way.
Although I do agree: Would it really hurt Apple to (!!gasp!!) go a couple mm's thicker so the iMac could handle a cheaper & faster desktop chip?
Or is this just about keeping the iMac from cannibalizing the Mac Pro?
Wow. Do I really have to repeat myself?:
If the new MID-RANGE Clarksfield i7 quad-core sells for about the same as a Core 2 Duo in the current 15-inch MBP, why would Apple suddenly raise the price of the MBP from $1699 to $2799??? Think about it.
Because they'll need a battery from the 27th Century to make it last more than 10 mins.
Check out the battery life of these processors... start at Anandtech.
That's at idle... 69 minutes! Even with Apple's super-duper batteries, you're looking at less than 1.5 hours battery life if you just stare at the screen and don't do anything.
And is this the ugliest Laptop ever, or what?
http://www.anandtech.com/GalleryImage.aspx?id=6888
Yes... there are 6 "MacBook Pro" models, and the mid-range is a 15" which sells for $1699... and the two chips in discussion are very similar in price, which I've been saying all along.
I was only considering 15" MBP's, where the $1999 would be the middle ground. Doesn't matter.
Though you need to read up on the i7... it has an integrated memory controller in the chip now, which requires less "tech" in the notebook. And the people who keep saying it's too hot for the MBP aren't realizing that it makes up for it by reducing the total TDP by getting rid of the hot memory controller that sits outside of the chip in Core 2 Duo notebooks.
Actually, I was playing Intel's online game this morning
Not to mention, when Apple releases new products, they tend to offer more performance at the same price or less (than their previous models). A quad-core is the next logical step for increasing performance, seeing as how Core 2 Duo's have plateaued... and these new i7's are really affordable.
I don't refute that, other than this particular sequence of upgrades. As I've said many times in this thread, which you steadfastly disagree with or completely want to ignore, is that Apple needs to add some things that their competitors have had or will be shortly releasing. These additions are going to bring productions costs up for their lineup. It was already pointed out in either the Q conference call or the end Q report, can't remember where exactly. Apple basically told everyone to expect lower earnings per unit due to these factors, and at that point they dropped the price of their line. It used to be higher actually, before the unibody. These prices are what people were paying for the 2.4Ghz Santa Rosa's on educator's discounts, if I remember right.
However, when Apple (if?) decides to finally add Blu-Ray and i7 chips, I don't think the consumer will be paying these low prices. Especially given that HP is putting out something with all the pizazz, and at $1700. It just doesn't compute that Apple will have better technology (read: batteries, enclosures) and yet cost LESS than HP's offering. If you prove to be correct Cdn, believe me that would be awesome. I just don't think so.
Because they'll need a battery from the 27th Century to make it last more than 10 mins.
Check out the battery life of these processors... start at Anandtech.
That's at idle... 69 minutes! Even with Apple's super-duper batteries, you're looking at less than 1.5 hours battery life if you just stare at the screen and don't do anything.
And is this the ugliest Laptop ever, or what?
http://www.anandtech.com/GalleryImage.aspx?id=6888
Though you need to read up on the i7... it has an integrated memory controller in the chip now, which requires less "tech" in the notebook.
It's very odd that this has not translated to the price of Motherboards in the desktop arena. i7 Mobos are still seriously expensive. The cheapest are over $200, and that's on a site like NewEgg. A good one will $400. OK, there are one or two that just sneak in under $200, but they're laggy latency crap. Phenom II Mobos or even Core Dup Mobos are less than half that amount.
Now obviously mobile solutions are a bit different, but your point about the 'external tech. being cheaper because there is more 'inside the chip' is untrue.
I know what they mean...
The battery life posted is the BEST case scenario. When using simple single threaded tasks like web surfing (which doesn't require 4 cores, or even 3ghz) it's even worse than the 69 minutes. The 2ghz in brackets is the CPU model, not the speed it's running during the entire test. My MacBook CD 2ghz CPU is, right now, running at 998mhz, not 2ghz for example.
CPU throttling has been around since 'Cool 'n Quiet' (AMD). Perhaps even before then.