Where is the rush? Apple has often trailed intel hardware releases by many months. Apple releases hardware on their schedule not, Intels and certainly not due to some Internet discussion.
Now I don't expect a Pro to come out that is just another bump to the current chassis. That doesn't imply anything about Sandy Brdige E nor any other chip they might use. What I'm saying is that there is more to new hardware than just the CPU chip. If you are really looking for a new and improved Mac Pro replacement you won't get excited over the fact that Sandy Bridge E was released a month ago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
Availability of the chips doesn't seem to matter much to Apple when it comes to the Mac Pro. They never updated it with Sandy Bridge Xeons at all.
I have been watching and waiting for the new iMac now for about three months. It will be my first Mac I am a heavy computer user (Not video rendering or scientific stuff) just work on it every day running some pretty hungry software building websites and research. I am sosooo tired of waiting I am on the edge of my seat about to hit the "buy it" key on a
iMac 27"
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7
4GB 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x2GB
1TB Serial ATA Drive + 256GB Solid State Drive
AMD Radeon HD 6970M 2GB GDDR5
$2,899.00
I'll add more memory myself...
another thought, and question is do you think the new upgrade will have a price hike as well?
Just needing a little input here to help me make my mind up...
Well,,,, really I was trying to make my mind up too about which mac but always leaning toward the iMac - Now I've made my mind up on it...
And I would add, I dont want to wait another month or two for a new Mac - Unless... It's a WHOLE LOT better than this one...
I dont know if the upgrade will make that much difference in what I do. Dont know if I would even notice it.... besides Ive read some rumors that the new design will be "thinner" Not that Id work mine enough to get it hot but if you already have heat issues and you make it thinner... that doesnt sound good to me...
Macs have quite a few proprietary parts. Power supply, motherboard, operating system, etc.
That's why Macs are so much more reliable than HP computers according to most surveys and while people are willing to pay a premium for Macs in some cases (although not as many as you might guess).
HP has definitely had some reliability issues, but Apple never comes out at the top of repair rate surveys/studies. I don't know if service is easier to obtain. If you live near an Apple store, it's easy to drop the machine off when it's under warranty, but genius bar staff generally aren't that helpful other than to take the machine in for repairs. I don't think I've owned a single problem free Mac, so they're not perfect either. The price difference varies depending on what you compare. They're fairly comparable when you're looking at 12 core workstations. It's usually within $500 in either direction. Both have problems, but the typical complaints are different. With HP it seems to be power supplies. Apple displays used to constantly end up with dead inverter boards. On certain models, Apple has experienced logic board problems. The repair costs on Macs are pretty high. HP is a little better in that regard, but it's still high whenever you're buying proprietary parts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
I've built two dual xeon Sandy bridge machines in the last month using Supermicro boards. Those machines rock. Every time I build one I wish I had the time to make a Hackintosh out of it, but alas they are all sent to the datacenter as servers.
How much of an upgrade were they over comparable nehalem/westmere models? Reviews have been all over the place on speed, but supposedly they run quite hot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ljocampo
Please Please Please Apple give me a new iMac. I need/want one in the may/jun time frame
Perhaps you should sacrifice a zune to Steve Jobs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
Where is the rush? Apple has often trailed intel hardware releases by many months. Apple releases hardware on their schedule not, Intels and certainly not due to some Internet discussion.
Now I don't expect a Pro to come out that is just another bump to the current chassis. That doesn't imply anything about Sandy Brdige E nor any other chip they might use. What I'm saying is that there is more to new hardware than just the CPU chip. If you are really looking for a new and improved Mac Pro replacement you won't get excited over the fact that Sandy Bridge E was released a month ago.
Given their design parameters, I wonder how much it would really change. I don't see the price going anywhere. I did mention the lenovo before, but it's still basically the same concept, only smaller. Assuming a desire for more than 2 TB ports, it means adding in another expensive chip. I don't know how many are supported or if it's simply limited by available PCI lanes. It'd be cool if you're right. If anything that would help convince people that they're still interested in the line, but they have certain parameters there. It's generally accepted that it should be silent or near silent, able to accommodate gpus comparable to what they have today, and it should address some of the more powerful available cpus. I have to wonder if they'll make the effort.
<div class="quote-container"></div>In addition the roadmapped 77W TDP Ivy Bridges are showing up as 95W now - possibly due to minor 22nm process issues? It would explain why the mobile IBs are coming in June rather than April as originally planned.
Of course, till chips and data "officially" show, this is all speculation, but charts and articles I have seen show that 77W TDP is still the plan for their first release of the desktop family chips, and with mobile series (projected June release) at lower TDP ranges.
Again, speculation, but some articles I have seen suggest that references to TDP of 95W for Ivy Bridge may be to define an upper limit to the power range for the whole Ivy Bridge family, and not necessarily be the wattage of the initial chips themselves. And also so that it matches the upper limit of the second gen i-series Sandy Bridge which were 95W - possibly to encourage a wider range of acceptability for mobos (both Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge using the same LGA1155 socket).
Regarding the anticipated early June release of additional Ivy Bridge including the wider mobile family, I think this is what has been planned, as per numerous leaks and tech web info. So I would not guess it being related to power over-consumption.
But hey, we are just making our best guess based on published and leaked info "as it develops" ... so time will tell ...
<p> is there any chance that we would see any of these chips in a mac mini?, if so, when will apple launch them?</p><p> </p>
Considering the current Minis design I'd say no. I believe the Mini maxes out at 35 watts processor power except in the server model. Apple might be able to beef up the Minis power supply and cooling but you have to remember that they need to allocate more power to USB than before.
<p> Im considering purchasing a mac mini, being my first mac, but I dont know if waiting is a good option.</p>
You might have to wait until June/July. The extra GPU performance would make that wait worthwhile though. I'm hoping for a majorly refactored line up so that is another factor.
Don't you just love the designs: black displays with a 90 degree hinge, chiclet keyboards with black keys, lack of stickers, large buttonless trackpads. Where do they get their ideas from?
It's mainly the dual-core versions of the laptop chips that are delayed until June. It seems it may be June 5th:
This would be in time for WWDC. The entire lineup should be refreshed by then. It would be iMacs and MBPs this week and the MBAs and Minis at WWDC. It might be a better idea to just do the iMac now though. It will have a minimal redesign (no optical & slimmer) so doesn't need an event. I think the slim 13" MBP will mean a convergence between Air and Pro, which means a June 5th launch.
The MBP laptop chips will be released in a few days… …It would be iMacs and MBPs this week…
Whoa, whoa, whoa… You're getting a little optimistic there, aren't you?
Quote:
I think the slim 13" MBP will mean a convergence between Air and Pro, which means a June 5th launch.
Not if Apple is just getting rid of the 13" MacBook Pro. There's no point to it anymore. They have the 13" Air to handle that.
What I see being controversy (meaning here, not in the real world, and meaning 'from the anti-Apple idiots here', not from us as a whole) is Apple dropping the "Pro" from the name.
Because you know it makes sense. The designs will be nearly the same after this revision (hopefully), so having just four models and one family seems logical.
Whoa, whoa, whoa… You're getting a little optimistic there, aren't you?
The iMac update is long overdue so it needs to come as soon as the chips are available. The MBPs can wait until WWDC. A Mac Pro refresh isn't out of the question either but it will need a redesign so WWDC could be the place to intro it.
Quote:
What I see being controversy (meaning here, not in the real world, and meaning 'from the anti-Apple idiots here', not from us as a whole) is Apple dropping the "Pro" from the name.
Because you know it makes sense. The designs will be nearly the same after this revision (hopefully), so having just four models and one family seems logical.
The new MacBook.
Available in 11", 13", 15", and 17".
I think that's what they should do, especially if they decide to drop the Mac Pro. It will bring on the criticism that Apple is abandoning the Pros who saw them through the rough years etc but the fact is, you can be a professional tennis player and own an 11" Air. Professionals have many varied requirements so the stigma of Pro vs non-Pro is unnecessary.
A Mac Pro refresh isn't out of the question either but it will need a redesign so WWDC could be the place to intro it.
That's something I'd forgotten about… they released the first one at WWDC; why not release the redesign there? Come full circle…
Quote:
I think that's what they should do, especially if they decide to drop the Mac Pro. It will bring on the criticism that Apple is abandoning the Pros who saw them through the rough years etc but the fact is, you can be a professional tennis player and own an 11" Air. Professionals have many varied requirements so the stigma of Pro vs non-Pro is unnecessary.
I don't think they should drop the Mac Pro, and I don't think that dropping the "Pro" name from the MacBook family will (should) in any way reflect on the "un-pro-ness" of the machines. The 15" and 17" will still have dedicated graphics, and the 17" will still have legacy ExpressCard/34 (unless they drop that, too…). They'll still be pro machines, and with faster CPUs to boot.
It's not as though Apple's going to just drop dedicated graphics across the whole line for the sake of making a range of four sizes of veritable MacBook Air…
I don't think they should drop the Mac Pro, and I don't think that dropping the "Pro" name from the MacBook family will (should) in any way reflect on the "un-pro-ness" of the machines. The 15" and 17" will still have dedicated graphics, and the 17" will still have legacy ExpressCard/34 (unless they drop that, too…). They'll still be pro machines, and with faster CPUs to boot.
It's not as though Apple's going to just drop dedicated graphics across the whole line for the sake of making a range of four sizes of veritable MacBook Air…
… r-right?
ExpressCard is history, it's PCI like Thunderbolt except 1/4 the speed so no need to include it. I also think with the introduction of USB 3, it puts an end to FW800 and ethernet but a GigE USB 3 adaptor can be included.
I think Apple will go the route of SSD cards in these and they need to hit the same price points in the worst case, while managing to ship 256GB minimum overall storage. We're pretty close to $1/GB so the SSD will be around $250-300. The dedicated GPU is probably $200-300 and the optical $100. They could go with 128GB boot drives with big HDDs to maintain the dedicated GPU but it will be interesting to see which way they go. The HD4000 is not far off the 6490M they used to use but is about 1/3 of the current 6750M so probably not a good idea to downgrade it in an $1800 laptop.
That's something I'd forgotten about… they released the first one at WWDC; why not release the redesign there? Come full circle…
I don't think they should drop the Mac Pro, and I don't think that dropping the "Pro" name from the MacBook family will (should) in any way reflect on the "un-pro-ness" of the machines. The 15" and 17" will still have dedicated graphics, and the 17" will still have legacy ExpressCard/34 (unless they drop that, too…). They'll still be pro machines, and with faster CPUs to boot.
It's not as though Apple's going to just drop dedicated graphics across the whole line for the sake of making a range of four sizes of veritable MacBook Air…
… r-right?
Perhaps an option for 8 GB of RAM in the 15" Air allowing for the maximum amount for the Intel HD 4000. Leave a more powerful discrete option in a thicker 15" Pro?
Perhaps an option for 8 GB of RAM in the 15" Air allowing for the maximum amount for the Intel HD 4000. Leave a more powerful discrete option in a thicker 15" Pro?
As much as it sucks, I can't see Apple going for more than 4GB across the board, even in the 17". I imagine also that there will be one size (one design) for the new machines, and that the low-end 15" will simply run cooler than the one with discrete graphics.
I have been watching and waiting for the new iMac now for about three months. It will be my first Mac I am a heavy computer user (Not video rendering or scientific stuff) just work on it every day running some pretty hungry software building websites and research. I am sosooo tired of waiting I am on the edge of my seat about to hit the "buy it" key on a
iMac 27"
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7
4GB 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x2GB
1TB Serial ATA Drive + 256GB Solid State Drive
AMD Radeon HD 6970M 2GB GDDR5
$2,899.00
I'll add more memory myself...
another thought, and question is do you think the new upgrade will have a price hike as well?
Just needing a little input here to help me make my mind up...
Well,,,, really I was trying to make my mind up too about which mac but always leaning toward the iMac - Now I've made my mind up on it...
And I would add, I dont want to wait another month or two for a new Mac - Unless... It's a WHOLE LOT better than this one...
I dont know if the upgrade will make that much difference in what I do. Dont know if I would even notice it.... besides Ive read some rumors that the new design will be "thinner" Not that Id work mine enough to get it hot but if you already have heat issues and you make it thinner... that doesnt sound good to me...
I'm getting very nervous... I'm afraid If I dont do something pretty soon my wife will take my Mac Money and buy a new living room suit or something... HEEELLLLPPPP!!!! :-(
As much as it sucks, I can't see Apple going for more than 4GB across the board, even in the 17". I imagine also that there will be one size (one design) for the new machines, and that the low-end 15" will simply run cooler than the one with discrete graphics.
Oh I just mean in the ones were RAM would be soldered on. Is 4 still the max? I would guess so?
not1lost - That's kind of lame. If it's money set aside for both of you, okay. If you really need a new living room set vs. a new computer, okay. Otherwise that is YOUR money and YOU should keep it for YOUR new MacBook Pro.
<div class="quote-container"> <span>Quote:</span> <div class="quote-block"> Originally Posted by <strong>Marvin</strong> <a href="/t/149313/bulk-of-first-wave-of-intels-next-gen-ivy-bridge-chips-bound-for-desktops#post_2098785"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" /></a><br /> <br /> <p> The MBP laptop chips will be released in a few days… …It would be iMacs and MBPs this week… </p> </div></div><p> </p><p> Whoa, whoa, whoa… You're getting a little optimistic there, aren't you?</p>
Read the chart. The chips coming available fit those product lines almost perfectly. In fat the iMac would be highly likely for an update. Same as with the MBPs. Remember Apple can only ship / update machines for which Intel has suitable processors.
45 watts might seem like a lot for a MBP but one has to take into account just how integrated that chip is.
As for the Mini well here is the rub, I believe Apple could design a Mini using the chips that are about to ship. The question is do they want to squeeze a 45 watt chip into that box. Last I remember they only had a 65 watt power supply for the entire load within the Mini. Even if they bump that to 85 watts you have to remember that they would need to allocate power to the USB 3 ports and Thunderbolt ports. That could easily be another 30 watts of power. In the end I think Apple will look for another solution beyond this chipset release.
<p> </p><div class="quote-container"> Quote: <div class="quote-block"> <div> I think the slim 13" MBP will mean a convergence between Air and Pro, which means a June 5th launch.</div> </div></div><p> </p><p> Not if Apple is just getting rid of the 13" MacBook Pro. There's no point to it anymore. They have the 13" Air to handle that.</p>
If the AIRs where all that great the current 13" MBP would not be selling as well as it is. I'm not sure why people don't grasp this but the AIR is and likely will be for some time performance constrained compared to the MBP, eve the 13" MBP.
<p> </p><p> What I see being controversy (meaning here, not in the real world, and meaning 'from the anti-Apple idiots here', not from us as a whole) is Apple dropping the "Pro" from the name.</p><p> </p><p> Because you know it makes sense. The designs will be nearly the same after this revision (hopefully), so having just four models and one family seems logical.</p><p> </p><p> The new MacBook. </p><p> </p><p> Available in 11", 13", 15", and 17".</p>
I don't think that distinction between the two models will be dropped. The exact name might not change but there will still be a huge gap between their performance machines and the so called AIRs. When people by MBP's that is what they expect, higher performance and increased capabilities over the run of the mill AIRs.
The difference between the MBPs and the Mac Pro is that Apple actually sells the MBPs in rather large numbers. The 13" MBP still out sells the AIRs and the other MBPs are leaders in their classes.
I'm getting very nervous... I'm afraid If I dont do something pretty soon my wife will take my Mac Money and buy a new living room suit or something... HEEELLLLPPPP!!!! :-(
Unless you're planning on doing very-high-end A/V work or cinema-quality 3D rendering, there's pretty much nothing a Mac with those specs can't do, though I'd highly suggest bumping the RAM to 8 GB or more to round out its capabilities. If high-end 3D games (such as Mass Effect, Battlefield 3, Deus Ex Human Revolution, etc) are something you really enjoy like I do, then that GPU will handle it without complaints. PCI expansion (should you need it) will be possible through thunderbolt units later this year.
The next model is all but guaranteed to have a faster CPU and improved GPU. Beyond that, it's anyone's guess. If having the best available power from those two components in an iMac is important to you, then wait for the next revision. Otherwise pull the trigger now and be happy knowing that you're going to have one hell of a machine on your desk.
Comments
Now I don't expect a Pro to come out that is just another bump to the current chassis. That doesn't imply anything about Sandy Brdige E nor any other chip they might use. What I'm saying is that there is more to new hardware than just the CPU chip. If you are really looking for a new and improved Mac Pro replacement you won't get excited over the fact that Sandy Bridge E was released a month ago.
Availability of the chips doesn't seem to matter much to Apple when it comes to the Mac Pro. They never updated it with Sandy Bridge Xeons at all.
iMac 27"
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7
4GB 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x2GB
1TB Serial ATA Drive + 256GB Solid State Drive
AMD Radeon HD 6970M 2GB GDDR5
$2,899.00
I'll add more memory myself...
another thought, and question is do you think the new upgrade will have a price hike as well?
Just needing a little input here to help me make my mind up...
Well,,,, really I was trying to make my mind up too about which mac but always leaning toward the iMac - Now I've made my mind up on it...
And I would add, I dont want to wait another month or two for a new Mac - Unless... It's a WHOLE LOT better than this one...
I dont know if the upgrade will make that much difference in what I do. Dont know if I would even notice it.... besides Ive read some rumors that the new design will be "thinner" Not that Id work mine enough to get it hot but if you already have heat issues and you make it thinner... that doesnt sound good to me...
Nope.
Macs have quite a few proprietary parts. Power supply, motherboard, operating system, etc.
That's why Macs are so much more reliable than HP computers according to most surveys and while people are willing to pay a premium for Macs in some cases (although not as many as you might guess).
HP has definitely had some reliability issues, but Apple never comes out at the top of repair rate surveys/studies. I don't know if service is easier to obtain. If you live near an Apple store, it's easy to drop the machine off when it's under warranty, but genius bar staff generally aren't that helpful other than to take the machine in for repairs. I don't think I've owned a single problem free Mac, so they're not perfect either. The price difference varies depending on what you compare. They're fairly comparable when you're looking at 12 core workstations. It's usually within $500 in either direction. Both have problems, but the typical complaints are different. With HP it seems to be power supplies. Apple displays used to constantly end up with dead inverter boards. On certain models, Apple has experienced logic board problems. The repair costs on Macs are pretty high. HP is a little better in that regard, but it's still high whenever you're buying proprietary parts.
I've built two dual xeon Sandy bridge machines in the last month using Supermicro boards. Those machines rock. Every time I build one I wish I had the time to make a Hackintosh out of it, but alas they are all sent to the datacenter as servers.
How much of an upgrade were they over comparable nehalem/westmere models? Reviews have been all over the place on speed, but supposedly they run quite hot.
Please Please Please Apple give me a new iMac. I need/want one in the may/jun time frame
Perhaps you should sacrifice a zune to Steve Jobs.
Where is the rush? Apple has often trailed intel hardware releases by many months. Apple releases hardware on their schedule not, Intels and certainly not due to some Internet discussion.
Now I don't expect a Pro to come out that is just another bump to the current chassis. That doesn't imply anything about Sandy Brdige E nor any other chip they might use. What I'm saying is that there is more to new hardware than just the CPU chip. If you are really looking for a new and improved Mac Pro replacement you won't get excited over the fact that Sandy Bridge E was released a month ago.
Given their design parameters, I wonder how much it would really change. I don't see the price going anywhere. I did mention the lenovo before, but it's still basically the same concept, only smaller. Assuming a desire for more than 2 TB ports, it means adding in another expensive chip. I don't know how many are supported or if it's simply limited by available PCI lanes. It'd be cool if you're right. If anything that would help convince people that they're still interested in the line, but they have certain parameters there. It's generally accepted that it should be silent or near silent, able to accommodate gpus comparable to what they have today, and it should address some of the more powerful available cpus. I have to wonder if they'll make the effort.
Of course, till chips and data "officially" show, this is all speculation, but charts and articles I have seen show that 77W TDP is still the plan for their first release of the desktop family chips, and with mobile series (projected June release) at lower TDP ranges.
Again, speculation, but some articles I have seen suggest that references to TDP of 95W for Ivy Bridge may be to define an upper limit to the power range for the whole Ivy Bridge family, and not necessarily be the wattage of the initial chips themselves. And also so that it matches the upper limit of the second gen i-series Sandy Bridge which were 95W - possibly to encourage a wider range of acceptability for mobos (both Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge using the same LGA1155 socket).
Regarding the anticipated early June release of additional Ivy Bridge including the wider mobile family, I think this is what has been planned, as per numerous leaks and tech web info. So I would not guess it being related to power over-consumption.
But hey, we are just making our best guess based on published and leaked info "as it develops" ... so time will tell ...
is there any chance that we would see any of these chips in a mac mini?, if so, when will apple launch them?
Im considering purchasing a mac mini, being my first mac, but I dont know if waiting is a good option.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ignigena
is there any chance that we would see any of these chips in a mac mini?, if so, when will apple launch them?
Im considering purchasing a mac mini, being my first mac, but I dont know if waiting is a good option.
If you can, wait. I believe we'll see some hardware update on the mini too in the next few months.
You might have to wait until June/July. The extra GPU performance would make that wait worthwhile though. I'm hoping for a majorly refactored line up so that is another factor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ignigena
is there any chance that we would see any of these chips in a mac mini?, if so, when will apple launch them?
No, the Mac Mini uses laptop chips. But it WILL be updated soon, so wait if you can.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
No, the Mac Mini uses laptop chips. But it WILL be updated soon, so wait if you can.
The MBP laptop chips will be released in a few days and a number of PC laptops will be getting a refresh:
http://asia.cnet.com/crave/intel-to-launch-ivy-bridge-quad-core-processors-next-week-62214314.htm
Don't you just love the designs: black displays with a 90 degree hinge, chiclet keyboards with black keys, lack of stickers, large buttonless trackpads. Where do they get their ideas from?
It's mainly the dual-core versions of the laptop chips that are delayed until June. It seems it may be June 5th:
http://www.slashgear.com/lenovo-roadmap-leaks-ivy-bridge-laptops-on-june-5-18223454/
This would be in time for WWDC. The entire lineup should be refreshed by then. It would be iMacs and MBPs this week and the MBAs and Minis at WWDC. It might be a better idea to just do the iMac now though. It will have a minimal redesign (no optical & slimmer) so doesn't need an event. I think the slim 13" MBP will mean a convergence between Air and Pro, which means a June 5th launch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
The MBP laptop chips will be released in a few days… …It would be iMacs and MBPs this week…
Whoa, whoa, whoa… You're getting a little optimistic there, aren't you?
Quote:
I think the slim 13" MBP will mean a convergence between Air and Pro, which means a June 5th launch.
Not if Apple is just getting rid of the 13" MacBook Pro. There's no point to it anymore. They have the 13" Air to handle that.
What I see being controversy (meaning here, not in the real world, and meaning 'from the anti-Apple idiots here', not from us as a whole) is Apple dropping the "Pro" from the name.
Because you know it makes sense. The designs will be nearly the same after this revision (hopefully), so having just four models and one family seems logical.
The new MacBook.
Available in 11", 13", 15", and 17".
Quote:
Whoa, whoa, whoa… You're getting a little optimistic there, aren't you?
The iMac update is long overdue so it needs to come as soon as the chips are available. The MBPs can wait until WWDC. A Mac Pro refresh isn't out of the question either but it will need a redesign so WWDC could be the place to intro it.
Quote:
What I see being controversy (meaning here, not in the real world, and meaning 'from the anti-Apple idiots here', not from us as a whole) is Apple dropping the "Pro" from the name.
Because you know it makes sense. The designs will be nearly the same after this revision (hopefully), so having just four models and one family seems logical.
The new MacBook.
Available in 11", 13", 15", and 17".
I think that's what they should do, especially if they decide to drop the Mac Pro. It will bring on the criticism that Apple is abandoning the Pros who saw them through the rough years etc but the fact is, you can be a professional tennis player and own an 11" Air. Professionals have many varied requirements so the stigma of Pro vs non-Pro is unnecessary.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
A Mac Pro refresh isn't out of the question either but it will need a redesign so WWDC could be the place to intro it.
That's something I'd forgotten about… they released the first one at WWDC; why not release the redesign there? Come full circle…
Quote:
I think that's what they should do, especially if they decide to drop the Mac Pro. It will bring on the criticism that Apple is abandoning the Pros who saw them through the rough years etc but the fact is, you can be a professional tennis player and own an 11" Air. Professionals have many varied requirements so the stigma of Pro vs non-Pro is unnecessary.
I don't think they should drop the Mac Pro, and I don't think that dropping the "Pro" name from the MacBook family will (should) in any way reflect on the "un-pro-ness" of the machines. The 15" and 17" will still have dedicated graphics, and the 17" will still have legacy ExpressCard/34 (unless they drop that, too…). They'll still be pro machines, and with faster CPUs to boot.
It's not as though Apple's going to just drop dedicated graphics across the whole line for the sake of making a range of four sizes of veritable MacBook Air…
… r-right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I don't think they should drop the Mac Pro, and I don't think that dropping the "Pro" name from the MacBook family will (should) in any way reflect on the "un-pro-ness" of the machines. The 15" and 17" will still have dedicated graphics, and the 17" will still have legacy ExpressCard/34 (unless they drop that, too…). They'll still be pro machines, and with faster CPUs to boot.
It's not as though Apple's going to just drop dedicated graphics across the whole line for the sake of making a range of four sizes of veritable MacBook Air…
… r-right?
ExpressCard is history, it's PCI like Thunderbolt except 1/4 the speed so no need to include it. I also think with the introduction of USB 3, it puts an end to FW800 and ethernet but a GigE USB 3 adaptor can be included.
I think Apple will go the route of SSD cards in these and they need to hit the same price points in the worst case, while managing to ship 256GB minimum overall storage. We're pretty close to $1/GB so the SSD will be around $250-300. The dedicated GPU is probably $200-300 and the optical $100. They could go with 128GB boot drives with big HDDs to maintain the dedicated GPU but it will be interesting to see which way they go. The HD4000 is not far off the 6490M they used to use but is about 1/3 of the current 6750M so probably not a good idea to downgrade it in an $1800 laptop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
That's something I'd forgotten about… they released the first one at WWDC; why not release the redesign there? Come full circle…
I don't think they should drop the Mac Pro, and I don't think that dropping the "Pro" name from the MacBook family will (should) in any way reflect on the "un-pro-ness" of the machines. The 15" and 17" will still have dedicated graphics, and the 17" will still have legacy ExpressCard/34 (unless they drop that, too…). They'll still be pro machines, and with faster CPUs to boot.
It's not as though Apple's going to just drop dedicated graphics across the whole line for the sake of making a range of four sizes of veritable MacBook Air…
… r-right?
Perhaps an option for 8 GB of RAM in the 15" Air allowing for the maximum amount for the Intel HD 4000. Leave a more powerful discrete option in a thicker 15" Pro?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter
Perhaps an option for 8 GB of RAM in the 15" Air allowing for the maximum amount for the Intel HD 4000. Leave a more powerful discrete option in a thicker 15" Pro?
As much as it sucks, I can't see Apple going for more than 4GB across the board, even in the 17". I imagine also that there will be one size (one design) for the new machines, and that the low-end 15" will simply run cooler than the one with discrete graphics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by not1lost
I have been watching and waiting for the new iMac now for about three months. It will be my first Mac I am a heavy computer user (Not video rendering or scientific stuff) just work on it every day running some pretty hungry software building websites and research. I am sosooo tired of waiting I am on the edge of my seat about to hit the "buy it" key on a
iMac 27"
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7
4GB 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x2GB
1TB Serial ATA Drive + 256GB Solid State Drive
AMD Radeon HD 6970M 2GB GDDR5
$2,899.00
I'll add more memory myself...
another thought, and question is do you think the new upgrade will have a price hike as well?
Just needing a little input here to help me make my mind up...
Well,,,, really I was trying to make my mind up too about which mac but always leaning toward the iMac - Now I've made my mind up on it...
And I would add, I dont want to wait another month or two for a new Mac - Unless... It's a WHOLE LOT better than this one...
I dont know if the upgrade will make that much difference in what I do. Dont know if I would even notice it.... besides Ive read some rumors that the new design will be "thinner" Not that Id work mine enough to get it hot but if you already have heat issues and you make it thinner... that doesnt sound good to me...
I'm getting very nervous... I'm afraid If I dont do something pretty soon my wife will take my Mac Money and buy a new living room suit or something... HEEELLLLPPPP!!!! :-(
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
As much as it sucks, I can't see Apple going for more than 4GB across the board, even in the 17". I imagine also that there will be one size (one design) for the new machines, and that the low-end 15" will simply run cooler than the one with discrete graphics.
Oh I just mean in the ones were RAM would be soldered on. Is 4 still the max? I would guess so?
not1lost - That's kind of lame. If it's money set aside for both of you, okay. If you really need a new living room set vs. a new computer, okay. Otherwise that is YOUR money and YOU should keep it for YOUR new MacBook Pro.
45 watts might seem like a lot for a MBP but one has to take into account just how integrated that chip is.
As for the Mini well here is the rub, I believe Apple could design a Mini using the chips that are about to ship. The question is do they want to squeeze a 45 watt chip into that box. Last I remember they only had a 65 watt power supply for the entire load within the Mini. Even if they bump that to 85 watts you have to remember that they would need to allocate power to the USB 3 ports and Thunderbolt ports. That could easily be another 30 watts of power. In the end I think Apple will look for another solution beyond this chipset release. If the AIRs where all that great the current 13" MBP would not be selling as well as it is. I'm not sure why people don't grasp this but the AIR is and likely will be for some time performance constrained compared to the MBP, eve the 13" MBP.
I don't think that distinction between the two models will be dropped. The exact name might not change but there will still be a huge gap between their performance machines and the so called AIRs. When people by MBP's that is what they expect, higher performance and increased capabilities over the run of the mill AIRs.
The difference between the MBPs and the Mac Pro is that Apple actually sells the MBPs in rather large numbers. The 13" MBP still out sells the AIRs and the other MBPs are leaders in their classes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by not1lost
I'm getting very nervous... I'm afraid If I dont do something pretty soon my wife will take my Mac Money and buy a new living room suit or something... HEEELLLLPPPP!!!! :-(
Unless you're planning on doing very-high-end A/V work or cinema-quality 3D rendering, there's pretty much nothing a Mac with those specs can't do, though I'd highly suggest bumping the RAM to 8 GB or more to round out its capabilities. If high-end 3D games (such as Mass Effect, Battlefield 3, Deus Ex Human Revolution, etc) are something you really enjoy like I do, then that GPU will handle it without complaints. PCI expansion (should you need it) will be possible through thunderbolt units later this year.
The next model is all but guaranteed to have a faster CPU and improved GPU. Beyond that, it's anyone's guess. If having the best available power from those two components in an iMac is important to you, then wait for the next revision. Otherwise pull the trigger now and be happy knowing that you're going to have one hell of a machine on your desk.