Oh, good. We get to hear wizard's endless Apple-hating complaints.
I see nothing anti-Apple about his post.
Quote:
Really? Why is a Thunderbolt-Ethernet adapter not viable?
Not financially viable. Just like with TB cables you'd need to have a controller chips in the dongle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
Of all of my hopes above I would think this would be the easiest One for Apple to realize. Especially when you look at Base RAM in the AIRs which I would expect would move to 4GB across all AIRs. Ram is basically dirt cheap these days. I could even see Apple buying up Elipda to own part of the supply chain.
Apple has no history of including extra RAM simply because it's inexpensive. Since there OSes uses less RAM than competing systems I wouldn't expect anything drastic on that front.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody
I would predict:
- no optical drive
- no hard drive but very large SSD
- VASTLY improved battery life
- much lighter and thinner
I'm not expecting anything drastically thinner or lighter. The ODD ? which takes up 25% of the 13" MBPs internal space ? is fairly empty and light for its volume so even if you replace a portion of that space with more battery you could add weight.
I also expect it to follow the tapered design of the MBAs but be thicker, perhaps being only slightly thinner than they are now at their thickest point. It would still small volume, more portable machine but basic specs could be misleading if one only looks at a single metic.
I am torn about the SSD. I think they need the fastboot of the MBA but the capacity of a spinning disc is a feature many need internally. There are a couple options to have the best of bother worlds. an Apple hybrid 2.5" drive, or an SSD card + 2.5" drive.
Why not slim down the plastic on the the RJ45 connector and not lose Ethernet? An adapter of that sort would be much cheaper than an adapter made to work through Thunderbolt.
But if you're going to move away from the RJ-45 jack so that an adapter is required then you have the option already available with the USB-to-ethernet adapter. The only thing it's lacking is USB3.0 so you can maintain gigabit speeds.
I'm not expecting anything drastically thinner or lighter.
I am. When the current design came out 3.5 years ago, it was drastically thinner (and relatively lighter) than the competition in its class. Time to do it all over again.
I have money in hand, Apple! Bring forth the new 13" Pros.
We still need Ethernet, I work in IT, use my mac all the time, sometimes WIFI is just not an option, Data/Wire rooms, wifi just may not work. or when I needed to FTP 2 gig of data off a USB drive to a NAS, Gig eathernet or crossover worked best, I would have never gotten it done that quick over WIFI, IBM thinkpads kept the Modem long after the modem was dead to 99% of users, Apple please keep the Ethernet port till at least 75% don't have a use for it
Oh, good. We get to hear wizard's endless Apple-hating complaints.
Really? Why is a Thunderbolt-Ethernet adapter not viable?
This has been explained so many times by so many people that I will just let you review the various postings over the last few days.
Quote:
TB is daisy-chainable. Besides, how many devices do you expect to attach routinely to your laptop, anyway?
A disk array and a monitor/hub. And no you can't do that over one link without suffering performance hits.
Quote:
There's something called a hub. Maybe you should ask someone to explain it to you.
Very few people need all that many USB devices in use at the same time.
Hubs don't always work well and sometimes not at all. Besides who wants to carry a hub around when it costs Apple nothing to implement a port? Each chipset that Apple uses ends up with unused ports which is a waste.
Beyond that I think you must be one of the few that don't come up short of USB ports from time to time. It is a fairly common complaint with laptops in general.
Quote:
Higher resolution is usually good - although there is a penalty in battery life.
So you are complaining about better screens?
Quote:
And I supposed you get to define that, right?
The onboard CPU in IB is important. Most people will find that they're using the discrete CPU only a very small percentage of the time.
With higher resolution screens we could see a regression in performance if IB does not get a bit of help.
Quote:
How often is 7 hours not enough for you?
You did see the comment about higher resolution screens did you not? Besides that 7 hours is for optimal usage and does not hold up for more demanding usage.
Quote:
In a laptop? Three SSD modules plus a magnetic drive? That's ridiculous. The number of people who would need that is infinitesimal.
Actually just about everybody I know could use that arrangement. The magnetic drive for bulk storage and the SSD's for fast OS and app access. The whole idea with the 3 bays of SSD is to allow for easy and low cost adjustment to the amount of fast storage you do have. Frankly this is no different than having RAM slots that are sometimes not populated.
Quote:
And that way you can complain about the price......
You're suggesting 3 SSDs plus a magnetic drive. If you have a large magnetic drive, why in the world is 512 GB necessary for the SSD? All you really need is enough to store the OS and apps. In fact, if they were to go with a separate magnetic drive and SSD configuration, that argues for a SMALLER SSD, not a larger one. 64 (or maybe 128) GB would be plenty if you have a 750 GB magnetic drive.
Because I have a laptop and I know what my current requirements are! Seriously 256GB is pretty puny these days even if you have a bulk storage drive. 512GB just covers you for the life of the machine.
Quote:
So you have another reason to complain about the price.
So what do you care, you will buy bargain basement AIRs and then complain about one capability or another.
Quote:
I don't believe Apple has ever offered cell phone connections internal in their laptops (although there was one prototype on eBay). I don't see any reason to expect that to change. It's easy enough to use a USB dongle for wireless (plus you don't have to stock different MBPs for each different carrier).
You did read the part about this being an expansion capability right? The goal would be a design that lets you plug in the LTE module of your choice when and if you need it. Now being Apple this would likely require a trip to the store but in the end it is the same thing an option that gives you LTE connectivity.
By the way I really do wish that we could rely upon WiFi but I find that it is not that wide spread where I'm at most of the time. LTE is just an option for the future.
I remember something SJ said a few years ago: "Apple only needs 4 computers, one consumer laptop & desktop and one pro laptop and desktop. In doing that we can keep our A team on each product".
I think they may revert back to that strategy by keep the MBA & MBP models now the basic MB has gone. Applying the same logic I think they may keep the iMac as the consumer desktop and merge the Mac Mini & Mac Pro into one scalabe pro model which also acts as a small business server. I think someone said they could daisy chain the Mac Mini so you simply add more Mini's to get the processing power, hard drive, RAM, etc that you need - I've no idea if that is technically possible.
I am. When the current design came out 3.5 years ago, it was drastically thinner (and relatively lighter) than the competition in its class. Time to do it all over again.
I have money in hand, Apple! Bring forth the new 13" Pros.
I'm talking about at the thickest point. You just can't get to much thinner on the chassis with the side mounted ports. You can probably have a slightly thinner bottom panel by reducing the bevel, use Gorilla Glass 2.0 to make it 20% thinner, use a thinner display and backlight arrangement, and use the milled top casing of the MBA to retain rigidity while increasing thinness. But those are all very, very small reductions in thickness. Even when added together I don't think they amount to much.
As previously noted that Ethernet port is 5/16th inch (8 mm) tall and is the largest single port interface in the system. Now that wasn't an issue when we had the ODD taking up just under 14 mm. But even with the ODD gone there is still an issue with the 35/45W TDP CPUs and dGPUs that will need airflow fo cooling. Part of this will be resolved with the ability to use the elongated MoBo that spans the back of the system along the air vents hidden between the display hinge but there is still a limit to the physics... as well as if ethernet can and should be removed at this time.
Currently they are 0.95" (24.1 mm), except for the 17" MBP which is 0.98" (2.50 mm). I'm expecting a reduction to only about 0.85-0.90" (21.59-22.86 mm) and for the 17" MBP to also be the same thickness as the smaller models. However, I'm expecting it to be tapered so that it not only feels thinner it's also taking up a lot less volume over the previous design.
I remember something SJ said a few years ago: "Apple only needs 4 computers, one consumer laptop & desktop and one pro laptop and desktop. In doing that we can keep our A team on each product".
Apple can actually afford the engineering teams to move their Mac products forward into the next decade. If nothing else iPad demonstrates that they can engineer new and desirable products.
Now the question is how much effort are they putting into these new MBPs. The machines could end up being just another spec bump or something really new and compelling. The rumors indicate a more respectable update, but we really don't know what that might be. However I can say this Apple needs a line of laptops that seriously out perform the AIRs. The AIRs simply compromise way to much with respect to CPU & GPU performance and will continue to as long as the design goal is ultra portability.
Quote:
I think they may revert back to that strategy by keep the MBA & MBP models now the basic MB has gone. Applying the same logic I think they may keep the iMac as the consumer desktop and merge the Mac Mini & Mac Pro into one scalabe pro model which also acts as a small business server.
Rightfully this should be in another thread, but I'd have to say Apples laptop lineup is in great shape compared to the desktop line up. Apples desktops need to be completely refactored.
Quote:
I think someone said they could daisy chain the Mac Mini so you simply add more Mini's to get the processing power, hard drive, RAM, etc that you need - I've no idea if that is technically possible.
Cluster computing has been around for ages. Hardware is not the problem, getting people to write the software is. I suspect cluster computing will remain with those with a more pressing need than the average Mac user.
Grab a heat of aluminum and you will understand. My point is Apple can't go too thin on the 15" & 17" models without real concerns about structural strength. At least this is the case if the stick with Aluminum. So maybe the Ethernet connector isn't really the limiting factor.
I also suspect that you are right about taper. The taper could be far more dramatic than what we see in the AIRs. If they stick with milled Aluminum we could see more Agressive internal ribbing for increased strength. This is possibly the most interesting part about CNC process, they can basically machine a laptop to any orientation or design they want.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I'm talking about at the thickest point. You just can't get to much thinner on the chassis with the side mounted ports. You can probably have a slightly thinner bottom panel, use Gorilla Glass 2.0 to make make that 20% thinner, use a thinner display and backlight arrangement, and use the milled top casing of the MBA to retain rigidity while increasing thinness. But those are all very, very small reductions in size.
As previously noted that Ethernet port is 8 mm tall and is the largest single port interface in the system. Now that wasn't an issue when we had the ODD taking up just under 14 mm. But even with the ODD gone there is still an issue with the 35/45W TDP CPUs and dGPUs that will need airflow fo cooling. Part of this will be resolved with the ability to use the elongated MoBo that spans the back of the system along the air vents hidden between the display hinge but there is still a limit to the physics... as well as if ethernet can and should be removed at this time.
Currently they are 0.95" (24.1 mm), except for the 17" MBP which is 0.98" (2.50 mm). I'm expecting a reduction to only about 0.85-0.90" (21.59-22.86 mm) and for the 17" MBP to also be the same thickness as the smaller models. However, I'm expecting it to be tapered so that it not only feels thinner it's also taking up a lot less volume over the previous design.
1) That's a complete ratification. I will be surprised if Apple isn't supporting 802.11ac in the next MBPs. Note that Apple supported 802.11n years before it was ratified and that 802.11ac is progressing much more competently and smoothly than 802.11n
2) Even once we get gigabit WiFi it'll still have less security, use more power and be slower due to more overhead than ethernet which makes it a less than ideal solution for those that need a wired connection.
I remember when Apple was the leader in ethernet technology. Apple pro products had it as standard at least 5 years before PC. To bad that Apple don't want to be leaders anymore and haven't adopted 10Gbits adapters.
802.11ac with 3 antennas is actually faster the gigabit ethernet. In real world tests a bit over 1 gigabit. With ethernet you are lucky to get 800Mbit from a gigabit cable.
BTW. I was one of the few crazy people who had a firewire network at home. Great speed. Wonder if Thunderbolt supports networking. An optical thunderbolt network at home would be fun.
I'm talking about at the thickest point. You just can't get to much thinner on the chassis with the side mounted ports. You can probably have a slightly thinner bottom panel, use Gorilla Glass 2.0 to make make that 20% thinner, use a thinner display and backlight arrangement, and use the milled top casing of the MBA to retain rigidity while increasing thinness. But those are all very, very small reductions in size.
And top to bottom, they will all add up to a significantly thinner body. Sans Ethernet.
I think apples strategy will be to try and keep both pro and air lines alive to cater for different markets.
If you can attract people who value extra performance to pay a premium for the Pro models why not do so?
The airs will be built for the average consumer who wants maximum portability (i.e. light weight and a cheap price)
Pros will be willing targeted at people who will pay a premium for the extras. The questions are what extras will people be willing to pay for?
My guess is greater battery life, more ports, and faster processors, in that order. Therefore the logical thing to do with the Pro models is make them the same thickness all the way through in stead of tapered like the air. Use that extra thickness for larger batteries, more ports along the side and better cooling to allow you to use faster chips.
They will be a little heavier but will be attractive to many road warriors
I remember when Apple was the leader in ethernet technology. Apple pro products had it as standard at least 5 years before PC.
I remember accidentally plugging the wrong ethernet cable into my Mac in order to do a PC-to-PC file. I was amazed that it could auto-sense the setup. Up until then I hadn't realized Auto-MDIX had been implemented. This made my life a lot easier.
Grab a heat of aluminum and you will understand. My point is Apple can't go too thin on the 15" & 17" models without real concerns about structural strength..
Aluminum is quite strong; comparing it to the foil in your kitchen drawer is meaningless.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
If they stick with milled Aluminum we could see more Agressive internal ribbing for increased strength.
So what? I wonder why everyone thinks that repeating this 1000 times makes it true.
Let's say the Thunderbolt Ethernet converter is $100. You're spending $2,000 on a laptop - how does $100 one way or the other make it "not viable'?
And if $100 is too much for you, you can get a USB-ethernet adapter for $20. For the vast majority of people, that's fast enough.
It's true because it's true. Just because the notebook cost more it means that adapters should be excessive so long as they are less than the cost of the device? What sense does that make?
And what sense does it make to buy 15x as much for the same result? Is there some sort of dick measuring that goes along with saying you're adapter is Thunderbolt?
Comments
Oh, good. We get to hear wizard's endless Apple-hating complaints.
I see nothing anti-Apple about his post.
Really? Why is a Thunderbolt-Ethernet adapter not viable?
Not financially viable. Just like with TB cables you'd need to have a controller chips in the dongle.
Of all of my hopes above I would think this would be the easiest One for Apple to realize. Especially when you look at Base RAM in the AIRs which I would expect would move to 4GB across all AIRs. Ram is basically dirt cheap these days. I could even see Apple buying up Elipda to own part of the supply chain.
Apple has no history of including extra RAM simply because it's inexpensive. Since there OSes uses less RAM than competing systems I wouldn't expect anything drastic on that front.
I would predict:
- no optical drive
- no hard drive but very large SSD
- VASTLY improved battery life
- much lighter and thinner
I'm not expecting anything drastically thinner or lighter. The ODD ? which takes up 25% of the 13" MBPs internal space ? is fairly empty and light for its volume so even if you replace a portion of that space with more battery you could add weight.
I also expect it to follow the tapered design of the MBAs but be thicker, perhaps being only slightly thinner than they are now at their thickest point. It would still small volume, more portable machine but basic specs could be misleading if one only looks at a single metic.
I am torn about the SSD. I think they need the fastboot of the MBA but the capacity of a spinning disc is a feature many need internally. There are a couple options to have the best of bother worlds. an Apple hybrid 2.5" drive, or an SSD card + 2.5" drive.
Why not slim down the plastic on the the RJ45 connector and not lose Ethernet? An adapter of that sort would be much cheaper than an adapter made to work through Thunderbolt.
But if you're going to move away from the RJ-45 jack so that an adapter is required then you have the option already available with the USB-to-ethernet adapter. The only thing it's lacking is USB3.0 so you can maintain gigabit speeds.
They have a very poor track record.
1) Is Ivy bridge designed motherboard ready?
2) Have intel started to supply Apple with Ivy bridge?
3) What about the GPU? Kepler is delayed. What about mobile 28nm AMD GPUs?
4) Is retina displays ready.
no
no
no
no
So... Trolling times is wrong again.
I'm not expecting anything drastically thinner or lighter.
I am. When the current design came out 3.5 years ago, it was drastically thinner (and relatively lighter) than the competition in its class. Time to do it all over again.
I have money in hand, Apple! Bring forth the new 13" Pros.
Oh, good. We get to hear wizard's endless Apple-hating complaints.
Really? Why is a Thunderbolt-Ethernet adapter not viable?
This has been explained so many times by so many people that I will just let you review the various postings over the last few days.
TB is daisy-chainable. Besides, how many devices do you expect to attach routinely to your laptop, anyway?
A disk array and a monitor/hub. And no you can't do that over one link without suffering performance hits.
There's something called a hub. Maybe you should ask someone to explain it to you.
Very few people need all that many USB devices in use at the same time.
Hubs don't always work well and sometimes not at all. Besides who wants to carry a hub around when it costs Apple nothing to implement a port? Each chipset that Apple uses ends up with unused ports which is a waste.
Beyond that I think you must be one of the few that don't come up short of USB ports from time to time. It is a fairly common complaint with laptops in general.
Higher resolution is usually good - although there is a penalty in battery life.
So you are complaining about better screens?
And I supposed you get to define that, right?
The onboard CPU in IB is important. Most people will find that they're using the discrete CPU only a very small percentage of the time.
With higher resolution screens we could see a regression in performance if IB does not get a bit of help.
How often is 7 hours not enough for you?
You did see the comment about higher resolution screens did you not? Besides that 7 hours is for optimal usage and does not hold up for more demanding usage.
In a laptop? Three SSD modules plus a magnetic drive? That's ridiculous. The number of people who would need that is infinitesimal.
Actually just about everybody I know could use that arrangement. The magnetic drive for bulk storage and the SSD's for fast OS and app access. The whole idea with the 3 bays of SSD is to allow for easy and low cost adjustment to the amount of fast storage you do have. Frankly this is no different than having RAM slots that are sometimes not populated.
And that way you can complain about the price......
You're suggesting 3 SSDs plus a magnetic drive. If you have a large magnetic drive, why in the world is 512 GB necessary for the SSD? All you really need is enough to store the OS and apps. In fact, if they were to go with a separate magnetic drive and SSD configuration, that argues for a SMALLER SSD, not a larger one. 64 (or maybe 128) GB would be plenty if you have a 750 GB magnetic drive.
Because I have a laptop and I know what my current requirements are! Seriously 256GB is pretty puny these days even if you have a bulk storage drive. 512GB just covers you for the life of the machine.
So you have another reason to complain about the price.
So what do you care, you will buy bargain basement AIRs and then complain about one capability or another.
I don't believe Apple has ever offered cell phone connections internal in their laptops (although there was one prototype on eBay). I don't see any reason to expect that to change. It's easy enough to use a USB dongle for wireless (plus you don't have to stock different MBPs for each different carrier).
You did read the part about this being an expansion capability right? The goal would be a design that lets you plug in the LTE module of your choice when and if you need it. Now being Apple this would likely require a trip to the store but in the end it is the same thing an option that gives you LTE connectivity.
By the way I really do wish that we could rely upon WiFi but I find that it is not that wide spread where I'm at most of the time. LTE is just an option for the future.
Apple please keep the Ethernet port till at least 75% don't have a use for it
We're long past that. Bye bye, Ethernet!
I think they may revert back to that strategy by keep the MBA & MBP models now the basic MB has gone. Applying the same logic I think they may keep the iMac as the consumer desktop and merge the Mac Mini & Mac Pro into one scalabe pro model which also acts as a small business server. I think someone said they could daisy chain the Mac Mini so you simply add more Mini's to get the processing power, hard drive, RAM, etc that you need - I've no idea if that is technically possible.
I am. When the current design came out 3.5 years ago, it was drastically thinner (and relatively lighter) than the competition in its class. Time to do it all over again.
I have money in hand, Apple! Bring forth the new 13" Pros.
I'm talking about at the thickest point. You just can't get to much thinner on the chassis with the side mounted ports. You can probably have a slightly thinner bottom panel by reducing the bevel, use Gorilla Glass 2.0 to make it 20% thinner, use a thinner display and backlight arrangement, and use the milled top casing of the MBA to retain rigidity while increasing thinness. But those are all very, very small reductions in thickness. Even when added together I don't think they amount to much.
As previously noted that Ethernet port is 5/16th inch (8 mm) tall and is the largest single port interface in the system. Now that wasn't an issue when we had the ODD taking up just under 14 mm. But even with the ODD gone there is still an issue with the 35/45W TDP CPUs and dGPUs that will need airflow fo cooling. Part of this will be resolved with the ability to use the elongated MoBo that spans the back of the system along the air vents hidden between the display hinge but there is still a limit to the physics... as well as if ethernet can and should be removed at this time.
Currently they are 0.95" (24.1 mm), except for the 17" MBP which is 0.98" (2.50 mm). I'm expecting a reduction to only about 0.85-0.90" (21.59-22.86 mm) and for the 17" MBP to also be the same thickness as the smaller models. However, I'm expecting it to be tapered so that it not only feels thinner it's also taking up a lot less volume over the previous design.
I remember something SJ said a few years ago: "Apple only needs 4 computers, one consumer laptop & desktop and one pro laptop and desktop. In doing that we can keep our A team on each product".
Apple can actually afford the engineering teams to move their Mac products forward into the next decade. If nothing else iPad demonstrates that they can engineer new and desirable products.
Now the question is how much effort are they putting into these new MBPs. The machines could end up being just another spec bump or something really new and compelling. The rumors indicate a more respectable update, but we really don't know what that might be. However I can say this Apple needs a line of laptops that seriously out perform the AIRs. The AIRs simply compromise way to much with respect to CPU & GPU performance and will continue to as long as the design goal is ultra portability.
I think they may revert back to that strategy by keep the MBA & MBP models now the basic MB has gone. Applying the same logic I think they may keep the iMac as the consumer desktop and merge the Mac Mini & Mac Pro into one scalabe pro model which also acts as a small business server.
Rightfully this should be in another thread, but I'd have to say Apples laptop lineup is in great shape compared to the desktop line up. Apples desktops need to be completely refactored.
I think someone said they could daisy chain the Mac Mini so you simply add more Mini's to get the processing power, hard drive, RAM, etc that you need - I've no idea if that is technically possible.
Cluster computing has been around for ages. Hardware is not the problem, getting people to write the software is. I suspect cluster computing will remain with those with a more pressing need than the average Mac user.
I also suspect that you are right about taper. The taper could be far more dramatic than what we see in the AIRs. If they stick with milled Aluminum we could see more Agressive internal ribbing for increased strength. This is possibly the most interesting part about CNC process, they can basically machine a laptop to any orientation or design they want.
I'm talking about at the thickest point. You just can't get to much thinner on the chassis with the side mounted ports. You can probably have a slightly thinner bottom panel, use Gorilla Glass 2.0 to make make that 20% thinner, use a thinner display and backlight arrangement, and use the milled top casing of the MBA to retain rigidity while increasing thinness. But those are all very, very small reductions in size.
As previously noted that Ethernet port is 8 mm tall and is the largest single port interface in the system. Now that wasn't an issue when we had the ODD taking up just under 14 mm. But even with the ODD gone there is still an issue with the 35/45W TDP CPUs and dGPUs that will need airflow fo cooling. Part of this will be resolved with the ability to use the elongated MoBo that spans the back of the system along the air vents hidden between the display hinge but there is still a limit to the physics... as well as if ethernet can and should be removed at this time.
Currently they are 0.95" (24.1 mm), except for the 17" MBP which is 0.98" (2.50 mm). I'm expecting a reduction to only about 0.85-0.90" (21.59-22.86 mm) and for the 17" MBP to also be the same thickness as the smaller models. However, I'm expecting it to be tapered so that it not only feels thinner it's also taking up a lot less volume over the previous design.
1) That's a complete ratification. I will be surprised if Apple isn't supporting 802.11ac in the next MBPs. Note that Apple supported 802.11n years before it was ratified and that 802.11ac is progressing much more competently and smoothly than 802.11n
2) Even once we get gigabit WiFi it'll still have less security, use more power and be slower due to more overhead than ethernet which makes it a less than ideal solution for those that need a wired connection.
I remember when Apple was the leader in ethernet technology. Apple pro products had it as standard at least 5 years before PC. To bad that Apple don't want to be leaders anymore and haven't adopted 10Gbits adapters.
802.11ac with 3 antennas is actually faster the gigabit ethernet. In real world tests a bit over 1 gigabit. With ethernet you are lucky to get 800Mbit from a gigabit cable.
BTW. I was one of the few crazy people who had a firewire network at home. Great speed. Wonder if Thunderbolt supports networking. An optical thunderbolt network at home would be fun.
I'm talking about at the thickest point. You just can't get to much thinner on the chassis with the side mounted ports. You can probably have a slightly thinner bottom panel, use Gorilla Glass 2.0 to make make that 20% thinner, use a thinner display and backlight arrangement, and use the milled top casing of the MBA to retain rigidity while increasing thinness. But those are all very, very small reductions in size.
And top to bottom, they will all add up to a significantly thinner body. Sans Ethernet.
Decent GPU + Retina display. Please don't undercook this Apple.
LTE would be nice too but that might overcook the Apple.
If you can attract people who value extra performance to pay a premium for the Pro models why not do so?
The airs will be built for the average consumer who wants maximum portability (i.e. light weight and a cheap price)
Pros will be willing targeted at people who will pay a premium for the extras. The questions are what extras will people be willing to pay for?
My guess is greater battery life, more ports, and faster processors, in that order. Therefore the logical thing to do with the Pro models is make them the same thickness all the way through in stead of tapered like the air. Use that extra thickness for larger batteries, more ports along the side and better cooling to allow you to use faster chips.
They will be a little heavier but will be attractive to many road warriors
I remember when Apple was the leader in ethernet technology. Apple pro products had it as standard at least 5 years before PC.
I remember accidentally plugging the wrong ethernet cable into my Mac in order to do a PC-to-PC file. I was amazed that it could auto-sense the setup. Up until then I hadn't realized Auto-MDIX had been implemented. This made my life a lot easier.
Grab a heat of aluminum and you will understand. My point is Apple can't go too thin on the 15" & 17" models without real concerns about structural strength..
Aluminum is quite strong; comparing it to the foil in your kitchen drawer is meaningless.
If they stick with milled Aluminum we could see more Agressive internal ribbing for increased strength.
You had me at "internal ribbing."
Not financially viable. Just like with TB cables you'd need to have a controller chips in the dongle.
So what? I wonder why everyone thinks that repeating this 1000 times makes it true.
Let's say the Thunderbolt Ethernet converter is $100. You're spending $2,000 on a laptop - how does $100 one way or the other make it "not viable'?
And if $100 is too much for you, you can get a USB-ethernet adapter for $20. For the vast majority of people, that's fast enough.
I'm just going on what your mom told me while she was blowing me last night.
Cute; next could you expound on your theory that iOS 6 will be a fusion of Metro and jelly Beans?
Cheers
So what? I wonder why everyone thinks that repeating this 1000 times makes it true.
Let's say the Thunderbolt Ethernet converter is $100. You're spending $2,000 on a laptop - how does $100 one way or the other make it "not viable'?
And if $100 is too much for you, you can get a USB-ethernet adapter for $20. For the vast majority of people, that's fast enough.
It's true because it's true. Just because the notebook cost more it means that adapters should be excessive so long as they are less than the cost of the device? What sense does that make?
And what sense does it make to buy 15x as much for the same result? Is there some sort of dick measuring that goes along with saying you're adapter is Thunderbolt?