In your lame comment, you mean to imply that FW800 are speedier than USB 2 drives in any truly meaningful way? Hardly.
Wow, you must have used some pretty bad FireWire drives. I consistently get much faster speed with my FireWire 800 drive than I do with my USB2 drive, I would go so far as saying my FireWire drive is two to three times the speed of my USB2 drive.
Not very exciting if it turns out to be genuine. You'd have to wonder though, why someone would go to the bother of photoshopping/printing a spec that looks so close to what the MBP already has.
I have been motivating my 9 yr old twins to perform their onerous Kumon and deluge of work to get credits to purchase the mac 15 " air when released this summer. Hope we get it this time around around $1300-1500 each.
Will be a goldmine/seller I believe. I own around $1.2 million of Apple (stock and options) - the stock should start its run shortly - no way hedge funds are not all in by Tuesday apple release/conference in SF
Hopefully this is just a base model, perhaps a $999 "starter" model. I would like to see more aggressive changes on the Air and Pro lines, rather than a spec bump. Acer is out there with 1980x1024 on 11.6" displays, so I'd like to see Apple at least make something like that optional.We'll find out for real next week.
There's a chance that Apple will keep one base model of the old design around as an entry level pro machine (either at or lower than the current $1199 price). This could be that machine. Apple did that with the white Macbook and previous other product line transitions.
I love the form factor of the 13" Macbook Pro, but a screen resolution of 1280x800 is crippling. Why they don't offer it up with a 13" Air display of 1440x900 is beyond me.
1) There is no platform fragmentation across different HW setups when apps install and run the same. Don't confuse that with developers having thousands of ROMs to contend with.
2) This has no size change or removable of the ODD so why would you look at the display resolution and think there is no change to any of the Mac notebook line?
3) The beauty of the Retina Display is that they could have both display types as options across the line.
4) I don't see where this says MacBook Pro anywhere. I see basic specs that are currently in the MBP category but remember there is no MacBook line right now, that the aluminum 13" MBP was a lowly MB during its initial release, and how Apple [I]might have to[/I] make a switch of removing the ODD by keeping machines with ODDs as the new MBs for those that absolutely need this antiquated component.
5) It could be a fake. I doubt it is but it could be. In any case it's nothing to get upset about.
Apple frequently sells older models for the low end and educational market.
Remember the white MacBook that was sold alongside the older ones.
That was my thoughts too, except they have a down spec'd MBA in that role now, and I don't think that is a product option (low end education) they would duplicate as both an MBA and MBP.
More likely to be a packaging preproduction mockup.
Surprised no one else has pointed this out yet but it could still have a retina display as a build to order model, the current 15" MBP has the option for a higher resolution screen.
The specs above, the option for a retina display and i am all set
anyone who thought it would be much different than this is probably mistaken. a Retina display would be very difficult because of the graphics power required to push that many pixels on a big 13" (or larger) screen.
I do think its funny that my 2011 13" MacBook Air still has higher resolution than the "Pro" line of notebooks.
If the specs are true, I'm glad to see USB 3.0 and that how FW and optical drive was not removed.
Can't wait to see some Intel HD 4000 graphics -- Anyone know how they handle hardware acceleration for things like Flash? My MacBook Air with HD 3000 gets HOT when watching Netflix (Silverlight, I know), and does not like to watch YouTube in HD without getting warm... I should not that I haven't experienced noticed many performance issues other than temps.
I call BS on this one. The 13" Air has a resolution of 1440x900 so I don't see them keeping a lower resolution for the Pro with this refresh. At the very least it will jump to the same pixel count.
People said exactly the same before the last refresh. The argument last time was the resolution might be lower but it's better quality in the Pro.
No way will onboard Intel graphics drive a 13" retina display anyway.
I call BS on this one. The 13" Air has a resolution of 1440x900 so I don't see them keeping a lower resolution for the Pro with this refresh. At the very least it will jump to the same pixel count.
Yeah, I am having trouble believing it too. Just doesn't make sense. Unless they are offering a higher res option.
If it is not a fake though the picture raises some red flags, perhaps it is a prototype of the packaging and the errors will be included (i.e. showing the amount of shared RAM with the integrated graphics)
Comments
Anyone tried scanning the barcode in the bottom right corner? I tried with RedLaser, doesn't work maybe you guys might have better luck
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crunch
In your lame comment, you mean to imply that FW800 are speedier than USB 2 drives in any truly meaningful way? Hardly.
Wow, you must have used some pretty bad FireWire drives. I consistently get much faster speed with my FireWire 800 drive than I do with my USB2 drive, I would go so far as saying my FireWire drive is two to three times the speed of my USB2 drive.
http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/macbook-pro-13-spec-leaks-thunderbolt-port-confirmed-20110223/
Not very exciting if it turns out to be genuine. You'd have to wonder though, why someone would go to the bother of photoshopping/printing a spec that looks so close to what the MBP already has.
I have been motivating my 9 yr old twins to perform their onerous Kumon and deluge of work to get credits to purchase the mac 15 " air when released this summer. Hope we get it this time around around $1300-1500 each.
Will be a goldmine/seller I believe. I own around $1.2 million of Apple (stock and options) - the stock should start its run shortly - no way hedge funds are not all in by Tuesday apple release/conference in SF
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
It also says Mac OS X installed. I thought they were rebranding to just OS X.
"OS X" is due for 10.8, and we know 10.8 won’t be shipping in June… So this (alas?) may be consistent.
Hopefully this is just a base model, perhaps a $999 "starter" model. I would like to see more aggressive changes on the Air and Pro lines, rather than a spec bump. Acer is out there with 1980x1024 on 11.6" displays, so I'd like to see Apple at least make something like that optional.We'll find out for real next week.
I love the form factor of the 13" Macbook Pro, but a screen resolution of 1280x800 is crippling. Why they don't offer it up with a 13" Air display of 1440x900 is beyond me.
And Apple still sells the iPhone 3G. Gotta be a base model somewhere.
I could see Apple reserving the Retina Displays for just the 15 inch and larger models as a selling point.
We'll just have to to wait and see.
1) There is no platform fragmentation across different HW setups when apps install and run the same. Don't confuse that with developers having thousands of ROMs to contend with.
2) This has no size change or removable of the ODD so why would you look at the display resolution and think there is no change to any of the Mac notebook line?
3) The beauty of the Retina Display is that they could have both display types as options across the line.
4) I don't see where this says MacBook Pro anywhere. I see basic specs that are currently in the MBP category but remember there is no MacBook line right now, that the aluminum 13" MBP was a lowly MB during its initial release, and how Apple [I]might have to[/I] make a switch of removing the ODD by keeping machines with ODDs as the new MBs for those that absolutely need this antiquated component.
5) It could be a fake. I doubt it is but it could be. In any case it's nothing to get upset about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crunch
In your lame comment, you mean to imply that FW800 are speedier than USB 2 drives in any truly meaningful way? Hardly.
Well, they are far far faster in a very meaningful way. FW400 is about 25% faster in real-life situations and FW800 is twice as fast as that.
Guess what?
One simple reason I believe it's not genuine.
On any MacBook packaging with this kind of label, the amount of graphics memory is always printed after the graphics card.
Example: Intel HD Graphics 3000 with 384MB of DDR3 SDRAM shared with main memory
Yet on this label: Intel HD Graphics 4000
Is it expected that Apple would mention less on this label?
BTW this is my first comment ever, how exciting. Lol.
Quote:
Originally Posted by foljs
Apple frequently sells older models for the low end and educational market.
Remember the white MacBook that was sold alongside the older ones.
That was my thoughts too, except they have a down spec'd MBA in that role now, and I don't think that is a product option (low end education) they would duplicate as both an MBA and MBP.
More likely to be a packaging preproduction mockup.
Surprised no one else has pointed this out yet but it could still have a retina display as a build to order model, the current 15" MBP has the option for a higher resolution screen.
The specs above, the option for a retina display and i am all set
anyone who thought it would be much different than this is probably mistaken. a Retina display would be very difficult because of the graphics power required to push that many pixels on a big 13" (or larger) screen.
I do think its funny that my 2011 13" MacBook Air still has higher resolution than the "Pro" line of notebooks.
If the specs are true, I'm glad to see USB 3.0 and that how FW and optical drive was not removed.
Can't wait to see some Intel HD 4000 graphics -- Anyone know how they handle hardware acceleration for things like Flash? My MacBook Air with HD 3000 gets HOT when watching Netflix (Silverlight, I know), and does not like to watch YouTube in HD without getting warm... I should not that I haven't experienced noticed many performance issues other than temps.
I had a Macbook Pro in 2007 that was just about as powerful. It was $3000 though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tkulla
I call BS on this one. The 13" Air has a resolution of 1440x900 so I don't see them keeping a lower resolution for the Pro with this refresh. At the very least it will jump to the same pixel count.
People said exactly the same before the last refresh. The argument last time was the resolution might be lower but it's better quality in the Pro.
No way will onboard Intel graphics drive a 13" retina display anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tkulla
I call BS on this one. The 13" Air has a resolution of 1440x900 so I don't see them keeping a lower resolution for the Pro with this refresh. At the very least it will jump to the same pixel count.
Yeah, I am having trouble believing it too. Just doesn't make sense. Unless they are offering a higher res option.
If it is not a fake though the picture raises some red flags, perhaps it is a prototype of the packaging and the errors will be included (i.e. showing the amount of shared RAM with the integrated graphics)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ewiz77
Specs looks really bad. I was totally hoping for a new design + retina display
Good. The rumor mill has done its job of hurting Apple by repeating false promises.