Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Quad Core, Thunderbolt In New MacBook Pros

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the get-yer-cult-on dept.

Portables (Apple) 495

Although as I write this the store is still down, the Apple web site has officially published the specs for the revised MacBook Pros, which top out at 2.2GHz quad-core Intel Core i7 for the 17" as well as offering a 512GB solid state drive. Somehow I don't think my boss will let me expense the one I want.

cancel ×

495 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

The extra speed should allow you to get first post (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299350)

Like this! This is a first post.

Re:The extra speed should allow you to get first p (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299838)

Congratulations, kid. Here is your lollipop.

Reduced battary life (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299356)

Looks like the battery life was greatly reduced this iteration, that was one of the major appeals of mac book pros to me.

Re:Reduced battary life (5, Informative)

kingtheseus (988956) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299404)

Apple is now using a more realistic battery life testing suite: "Apple is using a new, more rigorous battery test that measures the results you can expect in the real world â" like surfing your favorite sites in a coffee shop or catching up on the latest web videos."

Re:Reduced battary life (1)

dzr0001 (1053034) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299420)

Yep, the site lists battery life as "Wireless Web" battery time. If this is accurate it seems that the battery life is actually better than it was.

Re:Reduced battary life (1)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299880)

...and that was pretty good. I only have an old 2.16GHz MacBook, but the battery still kicks ass. My wife has the now-superseded MBP, and the battery in that is better still.

Although I still consider myself primarily a Linux user, I actually don't mind the Apple blend of unix-under-the-bonnet with the proprietary interface and apps. It's just that asswipe Steve Jobs who by rights should be bludgeoned in his bed.

sellout (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299942)

Although I still consider myself primarily a Linux user, I actually don't mind the Apple blend of unix-under-the-bonnet with the proprietary interface and apps. It's just that asswipe Steve Jobs who by rights should be bludgeoned in his bed.

You should be bludgeoned in your bed with a stuffed penguin for daring to sell out to the Cult of Steve. DIAF.

Re:Reduced battary life (1)

SimonTheSoundMan (1012395) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299486)

Also factor in the new sandy bridge quad-core CPU's that have a greater TDP than the older dual-core i3/i5/i7.

Re:Reduced battary life (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299596)

Are they changing chipsets, too? Mobile pentium processors had lower TDP than mobile Athlon processors at one point... but when you consider that the AMD solution eliminated half the chipset you ended up with lower TDP on the desktop with AMD than with mobile intel processors... for a while.

Re:Reduced battary life (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299898)

I'm pretty sure that going with Sandybridge CPUs requires going with Intel's newer chipsets. I'm not sure if the chipset TDP changed much; but the ones that support Sandy bridge are definitely different models, with slightly reworked graphics(which is presumably what allowed the 13 inchers to finally ditch the Core2+Nvidia chipset) and slightly different peripheral offerings.

Re:Reduced battary life (1)

wisty (1335733) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299856)

Only with all 4 cores blazing.

Intel has been working on better "scaling", so that for normal use (3 cores idle, and one at 100% trying to run a buggy Flash app, or a Javascript monster) it doesn't waste too much power.

Re:Reduced battary life (1)

SiggyTheViking (890997) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299938)

Running a buggy Flash app would be wasting 100% of its power, no matter how many cores are running.

512 grambits? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299406)

That's pretty heavy for a SSD, right?

Re:512 grambits? (1)

Stenchwarrior (1335051) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299528)

Not as much as you think. Since we're dealing with bits then it actually weight 64 grams.

Re:512 grambits? (1)

Stenchwarrior (1335051) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299566)

Not as much as you think. Since we're dealing with bits then it actually weighs 64 grams.

There, fixed that for me

Re:512 grambits? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299586)

It comes pre formatted for FAT32.

Thunderbolt (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299418)

Is Intel's official name for the technology formerly codenamed Light Peak

http://www.intel.com/technology/io/thunderbolt/index.htm

No, it's not an Apple made-up name.

Re:Thunderbolt (1)

SimonTheSoundMan (1012395) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299544)

Interesting, it seems it is basically mini Display Port with PCI Express at 10Gb/s on top. I welcome that. Over copper for now, but I guess the 100Gb/s version expected in 2020 may utilise fibre.

Re:Thunderbolt (1)

SimonTheSoundMan (1012395) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299810)

Just to add to my comment. 10Gb/s over fibre I would think requires single-mode glass fibre. Not the most durable of cable choices for day-to-day use.

I get through multi-mode plastic fibre ADAT cables pretty quickly because the fibre breaks somewhere in the cable. Glass, you only have to stand on, twist or bend at silly angles and it may break, and they don't come cheap.

Re:Thunderbolt (1)

Ferzerp (83619) | more than 3 years ago | (#35300030)

10 GbE runs over multimode fiber just fine.
8Gb FC runs over multimode fiber just fine. I don't see why the much shorter distances here would require single mode.

Re:Thunderbolt (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35300042)

Light Peak (or whatever they're calling it now) specifies a metal jacket around the cable, used for transmitting power. Presumably this can be used to keep the cable from bending out of spec.

Resolution (2, Insightful)

jevring (618916) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299456)

Nowhere does it say anything about screen resolution. Why is it that people seem to think that the physical size (in inches) of the screen is the only thing that matters?

Re:Resolution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299498)

because.... SIZE matters!

Re:Resolution (1)

The Outlander (1279696) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299506)

Apart from all the info in the tech spec section

-must get new glasses-

Re:Resolution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299514)

No where to be seen except, for the tech specs page, http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/specs-17inch.html

Re:Resolution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299518)

Nowhere does it say anything about screen resolution. Why is it that people seem to think that the physical size (in inches) of the screen is the only thing that matters?

Uh, yeah it does, under the Tech Specs tab.

Re:Resolution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299522)

You could look under "Tech Specs"... and you'd have the answer.

Re:Resolution (5, Informative)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299530)

13-Inch

Supported resolutions: 1280 by 800 (native), 1152 by 720, 1024 by 640, and 800 by 500 pixels at 16:10 aspect ratio; 1024 by 768, 800 by 600, and 640 by 480 pixels at 4:3 aspect ratio; 1024 by 768, 800 by 600, and 640 by 480 pixels at 4:3 aspect ratio stretched; 720 by 480 pixels at 3:2 aspect ratio; 720 by 480 pixels at 3:2 aspect ratio stretched

15-Inch

Supported resolutions: 1440 by 900 (native), 1280 by 800, 1152 by 720, 1024 by 640, and 800 by 500 pixels at 16:10 aspect ratio; 1024 by 768, 800 by 600, and 640 by 480 pixels at 4:3 aspect ratio; 1024 by 768, 800 by 600, and 640 by 480 pixels at 4:3 aspect ratio stretched; 720 by 480 pixels at 3:2 aspect ratio; 720 by 480 pixels at 3:2 aspect ratio stretched

17-inch

Supported resolutions: 1920 by 1200 (native), 1680 by 1050, 1280 by 800, 1152 by 720, 1024 by 640, and 800 by 500 pixels at 16:10 aspect ratio; 1280 by 1024 pixels at 5:4 aspect ratio; 1280 by 1024 pixels at 5:4 aspect ratio stretched; 1600 by 1200, 1024 by 768, 800 by 600, and 640 by 480 pixels at 4:3 aspect ratio; 1600 by 1200, 1024 by 768, 800 by 600, and 640 by 480 pixels at 4:3 aspect ratio stretched; 720 by 480 pixels at 3:2 aspect ratio; 720 by 480 pixels at 3:2 aspect ratio stretched

http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/specs.html [apple.com]

Re:Resolution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299614)

I stand corrected.

Re:Resolution (2, Informative)

jevring (618916) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299634)

I of course mean that *I* stand corrected. Not the anonymous coward posting from my phone... =)

Re:Resolution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299730)

I don't find myself praising Apple too often. But they deserve some credit for not going with that terrible 1920x1080.

Re:Resolution (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299540)

Actually it does. 1440x900 for the 15" with 1680x1050 as a BTO option. 13" is 1280x800 with a 1440x900 BTO option.

Re:Resolution (1)

SimonTheSoundMan (1012395) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299590)

Any higher and we'll need a resolution independent UI. Snow Leopard is not ready for this.

1680x1050 on a 15 inch makes text and other UI widgets small enough, any smaller and I'll need a magnifying glass.

Re:Resolution (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299812)

In the meantime there's always the OSX "Zoom" feature..

In my Ubuntu netbook I use a similar feature to get fullscreen flash video without slowing everything to a slideshow. Just hold Super and move the scroll wheel.. think I discovered it by accident.

Re:Resolution (1)

angel'o'sphere (80593) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299894)

What does "hold super" mean in this context?
Would love to test this zoom thing on my mac ;D
Thanx

angel'o'sphere

Re:Resolution (1)

mister_playboy (1474163) | more than 3 years ago | (#35300008)

In Linux we often refer the Windows keys as the Super key. If there is an Apple key on a Mac, try that.

Re:Resolution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35300046)

Hold the control key down and use the 'scroll wheel' or two finger verticle slide on the track pad. Zooms the whole desktop regardless of apps, even works in things like VMware machines with games running on them.

Re:Resolution (2)

telekon (185072) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299546)

Nowhere does it say anything about screen resolution. Why is it that people seem to think that the physical size (in inches) of the screen is the only thing that matters?

I always ask the same question about women.

Baby, I know it don't look big, but it can do 2560x1440 at 32bpp and 120 fps!

Re:Resolution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299706)

120 faps per second?

You must have the worst case of carpal tunnel ever. Either that or you have arms like Popeye.

Re:Resolution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299552)

The link is to Features, which is just an overview of the highlights, mostly focusing on things that have changed since the last version. If you want tech specs, click the tech specs link. For the 17 inch model:

17-inch (diagonal) high-resolution LED-backlit glossy or optional antiglare widescreen display with support for millions of colors
        Supported resolutions: 1920 by 1200 (native), 1680 by 1050, 1280 by 800, 1152 by 720, 1024 by 640, and 800 by 500 pixels at 16:10 aspect ratio; 1280 by 1024 pixels at 5:4 aspect ratio; 1280 by 1024 pixels at 5:4 aspect ratio stretched; 1600 by 1200, 1024 by 768, 800 by 600, and 640 by 480 pixels at 4:3 aspect ratio; 1600 by 1200, 1024 by 768, 800 by 600, and 640 by 480 pixels at 4:3 aspect ratio stretched; 720 by 480 pixels at 3:2 aspect ratio; 720 by 480 pixels at 3:2 aspect ratio stretched

And in the future, don't complain that something isn't there just because you didn't bother to look.

From the Apple website (1)

wiredog (43288) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299602)

http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/specs.html [apple.com]

Supported resolutions: 1440 by 900 (native), 1280 by 800, 1152 by 720, 1024 by 640, and 800 by 500 pixels at 16:10 aspect ratio; 1024 by 768, 800 by 600, and 640 by 480 pixels at 4:3 aspect ratio; 1024 by 768, 800 by 600, and 640 by 480 pixels at 4:3 aspect ratio stretched; 720 by 480 pixels at 3:2 aspect ratio; 720 by 480 pixels at 3:2 aspect ratio stretched

Took about 15 seconds to find.

iPad (1)

dave024 (1204956) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299484)

Now it would be cool to get Thunderbolt on the iPhone/iPad so we can sync the devices fast.

Re:iPad (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299604)

There is no way they are going to miss that.
Even if they will have to sell $40 dock thunderbold cables, pushing existing ipods/iphones/ipads to their i/o limits, people would buy them (indeed, when you have to fill your iDevice from scratch it takes ages with usb 2.0..).

1. Make blazing fast new i/o port
2. Make it retrocompatible
3. Make new cables for old devices
4. Profit!

Re:iPad (5, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299820)

Or Apple could get really crazy and issue a firmware update that allows the iPhone/iPad to optionally wirelessly sync in the background when at home/on the charger, so that "syncing" could take advantage of wireless networking and network storage capabilities(which things like the time capsule indicate that Apple can certainly handle) rather than being pretty much exactly identical to what Pilot 1000 owners were doing in 1996...

Re:iPad (1)

Vectormatic (1759674) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299872)

at which point the bottleneck will simply be your harddisk / the devices internal flash memory.

Modern SSDs are optimized for high data rates, flash memory in ipods/usb sticks, not so much. Even if you fix that, that slow HDD in your laptop will be the limiting factor.

How many slashdot icons does Apple get? (4, Insightful)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299488)

They have the Apple logo, iOS logo, iPhone, and Macbook. Why does apple get so many special Slashdot icons?

Re:How many slashdot icons does Apple get? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299510)

Because they make lots of news?

Re:How many slashdot icons does Apple get? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299556)

Most of the Apple "news" tends to be advertisements. Like this story.

Re:How many slashdot icons does Apple get? (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299852)

Well, Apple sell things. That's what they do. Not a lot of chance that Apple news won't somehow feature new products or rumours of new products.

Re:How many slashdot icons does Apple get? (4, Insightful)

Kjella (173770) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299922)

Most of the Apple "news" tends to be advertisements. Like this story.

And yet pretty much every tech site feel a need to post what is essentially free slashvertisements for Apple, otherwise people think they're out of touch with current trends. Of course slashdot being full of IT people and engineers hate all that branding, advertising, marketing and so on but you can't deny that the free publicity is a huge, huge business asset. Dell or HP or Acer releasing a new laptop model gets a meh on a few computer sites, that's all..

Re:How many slashdot icons does Apple get? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299516)

That's what you pay the premium for!

Re:How many slashdot icons does Apple get? (5, Insightful)

Rary (566291) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299598)

They have the Apple logo, iOS logo, iPhone, and Macbook. Why does apple get so many special Slashdot icons?

Meanwhile, Microsoft gets a dated sci-fi reference attached to a dated image of a guy who doesn't work there anymore.

Re:How many slashdot icons does Apple get? (1)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299724)

I guess to be fair, Microsoft does have a windows icon.... of a broken, battered window pane. http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/windows_64.png [fsdn.com]

Re:How many slashdot icons does Apple get? (1)

Ancantus (1926920) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299936)

hehehe I like that one, wonder why they don't use it more.

Re:How many slashdot icons does Apple get? (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299950)

You've just made me realise: what sci-fi isn't "dated" by now?

Of course I generally watch stuff on DVD rather than TV these days, but I don't remember even hearing of any recent good sci-fi shows that aren't a remake or a continuation of some show from the 20th century.. in fact, even if you take out the "good", what fresh stuff has there been?

Though it has to be said that dated doesn't mean bad. Lightsabers are incredibly dated, but I still want one :) and the BSG remake was pretty damn good.

Re:How many slashdot icons does Apple get? (1)

Kildjean (871084) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299994)

They should get a balmer borg pic

Re:How many slashdot icons does Apple get? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35300080)

They have the Apple logo, iOS logo, iPhone, and Macbook. Why does apple get so many special Slashdot icons?

Slashdot should also signal which stories contain 200 comments complaining about the price of Apple products. Maybe by including an apple silhouette in the icon?

Ouch! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299520)

and I just bought my mac last week!

Re:Ouch! (2)

SimonTheSoundMan (1012395) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299642)

Take it back for a refund.

Number of Apple stories in last three days (2)

commodore6502 (1981532) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299574)

Dozens.

Overkill much?

Re:Number of Apple stories in last three days (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299696)

As the largest technology company in the world (by market capitalization) and one of the most influential (How many companies are rushing to sell touch-screen tablets now? Why, all of a sudden? Oh yeah.) they generate a lot of "news for nerds."

Of course, those same nerds like nothing more than to make fun of the big, popular, and prominent; that's why they're nerds. Which is why they read the stories and complain about them, rather than simply un-checking the "Apple" category in their Slashdot preference settings.

Re:Number of Apple stories in last three days (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299926)

No, Apple hardly makes any "news for nerds." Even Microsoft has a more interesting research department than Apple does (none of which is posted about here). Slashdot became about the nerd has-beens around 2004-2005... but lately it's reached a new low point.

Today I can't even tell the difference between Slashdot and Digg - or for a news equivalent, The Today Show.

Re:Number of Apple stories in last three days (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35300066)

No, Apple hardly makes any "news for nerds." Even Microsoft has a more interesting research department than Apple does (none of which is posted about here). Slashdot became about the nerd has-beens around 2004-2005... but lately it's reached a new low point.

Today I can't even tell the difference between Slashdot and Digg - or for a news equivalent, The Today Show.

Thank you for proving my point. Apple is so boring to you you're going to read every story and, then take the time to post and complain about it.

Re:Number of Apple stories in last three days (3, Insightful)

commodore6502 (1981532) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299968)

>>>un-checking the "Apple" category

I don't mind reading Apple stories.
I mind reading the SAME "rumors about macbook" story three times in three days.

can't expense that much? (2)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299612)

well, buy a pc. get more for less. and there's some good chassis too available(and they come with built in 3g, bluray, esata, usb3 etc etc). they'll even work nicely with your old firewire devices ;).

of course though, maybe you really must have the new interconnect to connect.. erm, well, nothing. well, some devices will come with due time and you're going to be paying your mac tax on the thunderbolt cables.

Re:can't expense that much? (2, Insightful)

angel'o'sphere (80593) | more than 3 years ago | (#35300052)

well, buy a pc. get more for less. and there's some good chassis too available(and they come with built in 3g, bluray, esata, usb3 etc etc). they'll even work nicely with your old firewire devices ;).

I assume you just make fun, but I don't get why people repeat this. I don't even want to start arguing about prices and quality ....

If i buy a PC ... you know ... then ... think about it: obviously then I have a PC, right? And not a Mac. So how can buying a PC be more when in fact it is of zero value for me?
Your comparison is like if I want to buy a horse and you come and tell me: "hey for the same money you get two cows! You can ride cows, too! And you can train them to pull lumber out of the wood as well, and you can even use them to pull your coach! Clearly a cow is far cheaper and superior over a horse!"

Sorry mate: I want a horse not a stinking cow. I'm well aware that a horse costs slightly more than a cow. But I value having the horse higher than I miss the extra bucks I spend. After all my new shiny horse "works out of the box" and I don't have to teach it tricks to do what I want (installing drivers, reinstalling the OS every 4 to 12 weeks, being pissed of by Internet Exploder interferences ... does all not happen on my Mac).

angel'o'sphere

The 15 inch quad core price is very disappointing (2)

Shivetya (243324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299622)

at 2199. The fact the base resolution isn't much better than Windows budget computers irks me too. If anything their prices are worse than before. The whole push seems to be to get LightPeak out ahead of the iPad2 which many have speculated that the unknown connector on it was LightPeak

The 13 inch laptop is disappointing when compared to even the MBA line. I am can almost justify the 13 price structure but I still trying to get my hands around where they are with the 15 laptops.

I love my Apple iMac but I certainly don't see value in their laptops, I can get by just fine with a $600 dollar range Windows Laptop and have done a trip or two with a netbook just fine. The price difference alone changes how you deal with them on trips, when I traveled with my previous 2.4 MBP I was loathe to leave out of my sight, checking it in at the desk when I had to be out of the room for hours. With the others I just stuffed them under a pillow.

The only thing Pro about these is the price. The name is a pretentious as those with them who camp at Starbucks

Re:The 15 inch quad core price is very disappointi (5, Interesting)

glennpratt (1230636) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299846)

I thought the same before using a MacBook Pro every day for work for a year.

You just don't get the stability, performance, battery life and build quality in a cheap Windows notebook (I've bought tons of them after much research when I worked in IT). Runs for months on end, 80 hour weeks, never shutdown, rarely restarted, basically never gets in my way.

Macintosh quality (3, Interesting)

Relayman (1068986) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299990)

I walked into an office recently and a coworker saw my MacBook Pro and said, "I wish I had that instead of this Dell POS. Just look at the screen resolution!" Put a four-year old MacBook Pro next to a four-year old Dell laptop and you will be able to see the difference. There will not be any missing cheap plastic pieces on the Mac.

Re:The 15 inch quad core price is very disappointi (2)

Antisyzygy (1495469) | more than 3 years ago | (#35300060)

Not really worth the 500-1000 dollar upcharge IMO. My HP ultraportable never gets in my way either. I turn it off it once every couple days just because I don't need it all the time. For example, when I am sleeping. Also, the build quality is as good as any Macbook I've ever used (My wife likes Macbook and owns a refurb one as I won't allow her to buy a new one because of the ridiculous cost). It has a brushed aluminum chassis with a plastic bottom, however it actually is nice this way as its super lite and has some rubber gripping spots on all four corners that blend seamlessly and keep it from sliding around on smooth surfaces. It also has a chiclet like keyboard that is actually easier to type on than any other laptop Ive used. It has buttons in places that make it extremely functional and ergonomic with the exception of the power button being a weird sliding button on the side. Still, its worth it because it cost me about 650 when it first came out at a special sale at Office Depot which actually was cheaper than HP sold them for on their website. I don't dispute that Apple brought something to the table with build quality a few years ago, but HP has totally caught up in their Envy, Ultraportable and Performance categories. If you need up-time install a Linux distribution. The sub 500-700 dollar notebooks are still crap depending on which manufacturer you get them from. I'm just arguing Apple isn't as good as everyone argues they are hardware and build wise, so people should really be arguing that 500-1000 dollars upcharge is worth the OS, extra aluminum, magsafe plug, trackpad and led backlit keyboard rather than saying they are superior in every way, because that simply is not true.

Re:The 15 inch quad core price is very disappointi (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299914)

This is incorrect, the base quad core 15 inch is $1800 (source: http://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/24/apple-launches-macbook-pros-with-thunderbolt-quad-core-cpus-amd-gpus/) still expensive, however a lot less than the $2200.

Re:The 15 inch quad core price is very disappointi (1)

MemoryDragon (544441) | more than 3 years ago | (#35300022)

Same thought I have not seen the prices yet, but I assume Apple used the product change for yet another pricehike like it has happend so often in the past. The bigest issues indeed is the lack of a good graphics processor in the 13 inch macbook pro. Guess it is now slowly time to say goodbye to Apple. My current macbook pro 13 inch will hopefully last for another bunch of years but then if Apple does not change their product offering in the low range again to something worthwhile graphicswise I will say goodbye.
The integration of an Intel only GPU solution for me definitely is a deal breaker!

On the graphics side (1)

MemoryDragon (544441) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299646)

The 13 inch model is a letdown, it only has an intel graphics processor, only time will tell if this is not a significant performance downgrade to the nividia solution before. At least the 15 inch and 17 inch models still have discrete graphics processors.

Re:On the graphics side (3, Interesting)

Sancho (17056) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299832)

You can get an idea right now, since the HD3000 has been out for a while. Basically, in raw GPU performance, it's pretty lousy. There are places where the memory bus improvements can make up some of the difference, but frankly, I consider this a step back. It's a shame, too--I'd been planning on picking up the 13" MBP after this refresh. Now I'm going to start looking at other notebooks.

Re:On the graphics side (1)

MemoryDragon (544441) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299910)

Ok thanks for the clarification, I just expected such a miserable result from an Intel offering. Oh well, I hope my 13 inch intel based notebook will last a while longer. I am not to eager to switch to the 15 inch notebook because the form factor fits perfectly. Once it dies I will have to get a non apple machine I guess, or an old 13 inch model second hand.
Is there any address where you can write apple about your personal concerns about this epic fail.

crysis? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299674)

yes but, do macbooks run crysis ?

AMD Graphics (1)

Tanispyre (690330) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299684)

While not totally unexpected, I was a little surprised to see that Apple has dropped nVidia for AMD discrete graphics controller. I wasn't expecting to see that change for another cycle.

nothing I don't have in my 1 year old HP Envy 15 (-1, Troll)

darkeye (199616) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299698)

seriously, Apple hardware is sub-par. my 1 year old HP Envy 15 has the same CPU, true HD (1920x1080) 15" screen, SSD, etc. features. and it's already 1 year old. the only place Apple beats it is the AMD Radeon HD 6490M graphics card - I only have an HD 5830M.

and I wonder, why don't they still offer a true HD (1080p) capable LCD? they over a 1050-line screen - just 30 lines less? what's the point?

oh, let me guess - next year the 'true HD experience' is going to be the marketing driving point?

Re:nothing I don't have in my 1 year old HP Envy 1 (1)

PhilHibbs (4537) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299806)

The 17" screen is 1200 pixels, the 15" is 900, what are you talking about? The 17" supports a 1050 pixel mode, but I'm guessing that that's something to do with the video card as that's quite a common PC screen resolution. I don't know why the video card standards don't match the TV resolutions but it's not Apple's doing.

Re:nothing I don't have in my 1 year old HP Envy 1 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299834)

I am impressed - your 1 year old laptop features a CPU that has only been on the market for about 3 months. You truly are "special" sir.

Re:nothing I don't have in my 1 year old HP Envy 1 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299836)

wow you have light peak before it was released? holy fuck.

Re:nothing I don't have in my 1 year old HP Envy 1 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299924)

i'd rather take 1920x1200 over 1080p .. more pixels more vertical space. Too bad their smaller versions dont have 1920x1200.

Re:nothing I don't have in my 1 year old HP Envy 1 (1)

Vectormatic (1759674) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299974)

the only place Apple beats it is the AMD Radeon HD 6490M graphics card - I only have an HD 5830M.

i'm not quite up to date with AMDs model numbers (havent heard of the 6490), but 6490 suggests that it is the fastest card (90) in the low end range (400) of the 6 series, while your card is the slowest card in the high end range of the 5 series, past experience has taught me that your card should be MUCH faster

looking up the specs reveals that the 6490 has only half the memory bandwidth, and 1 5th the amount of shaders, even though its clock speed is up to 50% faster, the 5830 will be MUCH faster

Buyer's remorse or Buyer's rejoice? (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299704)

Awe damn it... I just bought this Toshiba two weeks ago [toshibadirect.com]
  1. Intel® Core i7-740QM processor (quad core 3.6 GHz)
  2. Genuine Windows 7 Home Premium (64-bit) -- (Also, I've installed Linux -- Dual Boot)
  3. 6GB DDR3 1066MHz memory (50% more than Macbook?)
  4. 564GB: 64GB SSD (Serial ATA) + 500GB (7200rpm, Serial ATA) -- ( 52 more GBs than Macbook, but only part SSD )
  5. 1.5GB GDDR5 NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 460M -- (What's the Macbook got? Plus, I can play most games on this out of the box)

Additional features:
Quad-core Processor, 7200 RPM Hard Drive, Solid State Drive, Blu-ray, LED Backlit Keyboard, HDMI port, harman/kardon® speakers, Face Recognition, Numeric 10-key Pad, Webcam and Mic, Bluetooth®

Why wasn't there an article about my laptop? (Is it because it doesn't have that special Light Peak connector? Does my lit keyboard make up for that? :-P )

Re:Buyer's remorse or Buyer's rejoice? (1)

armanox (826486) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299892)

Oh Toshiba. Every time I think about buying a new laptop (and getting a Macbook) I end up buying a new Toshiba. You also forgot to mention how sturdy your Toshiba is (I've had quite a few of them take some falls with no ill effects).

Re:Buyer's remorse or Buyer's rejoice? (2)

chill (34294) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299932)

Bah! The wireless is only in the 2.4 GHz spectrum. They left out the 802.11a/n 5 GHz bits.

Can you tell me if the wifi is provided by a mini-PCI or mini-PCIe card? If so, I could replace it with something proper that does both 2.4 & 5 GHz.

Re:Buyer's remorse or Buyer's rejoice? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299984)

'Does my lit keyboard make up for that?'

no but the utter shiny fugliness of your laptop does.

Re:Buyer's remorse or Buyer's rejoice? (1)

LDAPMAN (930041) | more than 3 years ago | (#35300016)

One reason is "Weight starting at 10 pounds"! That 3.6 GHz is the speed it can jump to on demand....the same as the processor in the Macbook. The actual spec on the link you provided is : "1.73 GHz (2.93 GHz with Turbo Boost Technology), 6MB L3 Cache"

Re:Buyer's remorse or Buyer's rejoice? (1)

Relayman (1068986) | more than 3 years ago | (#35300054)

What about the $1,000 worth of software (iLife) that comes on the Mac? Or do you just use your Toshiba for browsing and e-mail?

now the cheaper macbook pro is better then mac pro (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299712)

now the cheaper macbook pro is better then mac pro BUT IT COSTS LESS.

Ok the mac pro may have a better video card and faster cpu but $2500 for a desktop with out screen with only a quad core cpu and 3gig ram vs a laptop with quad core screen and 4 gb ram?.

$1200 for a 13" laptop with INTEL VIDEO?? when other systems have faster cpus and better video cards + bigger HDD's for $400-$600 less?

look like the mini is still at Core 2 Duo and the mac pro is still at the same cpu spped and price.

How will Thunderbolt work on the mini? will the mini dp / Thunderbolt to DVI cable come with a DVI and Thunderbolt port on it?

Mac pro with Thunderbolt? how will apple get this new port on to add in video card? some kind of voodoo 1 / 2 loopback cable?

Re:now the cheaper macbook pro is better then mac (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299788)

Xeon processors, RAID capabilities, SAS drives, and you say the Macbook Pro is "better"?? :confused:

Kind of weak (-1, Troll)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299726)

I know its a i7, but 2.2Ghz PRO model? Knowing apple its going to be retarded in cost and you can get a 2.8Ghz i7 Toshiba for 1200$, added onto a painted prison OS, and darn near a decade old design, which IMO looks like baby's first day with the rounded rectangle tool, and the local snob dealership that cant be bothered to look at you until you wipe your ass with a bill, I know I will be jumping in line for last years bottom line upper class laptop when it finally ships from apple sometime later!

Re:Kind of weak (2)

SirMasterboy (872152) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299988)

2.8Ghz quad core i7 in a Toshiba? Impossible...

The fastest sandy bridge quad core i7 is the Core i7-2920XM which is 2.5Ghz. It's MSRP alone is $1096 because is the top-end extreme edition so even if Toshiba used that, there is no way the laptop would be anywhere close to $1200 let alone even under $2000.

Apple is using the Core i7-2720QM 2.2Ghz which has an MSRP of $378 already.

There is one processor in between these and that's the Core i7-2820QM which is 2.3Ghz and runs $568.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i7_microprocessors#.22Sandy_Bridge.22_.2832_nm.29_2 [wikipedia.org]

Oh Apple... (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299746)

I hope Apple hasn't let their fascination with reducing port count get in the way of what might otherwise have been an interesting technology...

By amalgamating the mini-displayport and the light peak data lines, they certainly have kept another small hole in the chassis from sullying the 2001-esque purity to which they aspire. However, that means that you can't use an external monitor and a light peak device at the same time, unless you either deal with an ugly(almost certainly powered) breakout box, or buy an entirely new monitor that embeds the breakout box and/or a bunch of light peak-connected ports in itself(just like the ADC monitors of yore...).

I strongly suspect that Apple will release one or more of the latter in their next Cinema Display refresh(to bad, so sad, people who purchased the mini-displayport refresh...) which will allow them to have some USB and firewire ports, likely along with audio and webcam, on the monitor without additional cabling... How more interesting(but niche) uses of a 10gb/s interconnect, like high-speed storage or local networking, will be addressed is less clear. They are likely too niche and too expensive to make it into a mass-market monitor; so I assume that they'll be waiting on the ugly breakout box...

Lest anybody think that I am being down on Apple just for the sake of hating on Apple, consider this: Plain old Displayport has, since 2009, supported multi-display daisy chaining, along with a 720mb/s "aux" data channel for non-video peripherals in the chain. As of 2011, there are(to the best of my knowledge), zero displayport peripherals, announced or in production, that either support display daisy chaining or use the AUX channel to integrate USB ports, webcams, audio, or other peripheral functions into displayport devices without the use of additional cabling, despite 720mb/s being ample for quite a few applications. Zip, zero, nada.

Now Apple has taken light peak and, in the interests of reducing port count, basically produced a Displayport connector with an additional, high speed, AUX channel. Unless they have a clever plan in mind to make it useful for niche cases that could actually use the 10gb/s, without blocking external monitor capabilities(because is Joe Video Editor really going to want to choose between his gigantic direct-attached-RAID-array and his gigantic screen?), they've basically produced ADC2.0. Whee!

Thunderbolt based on pci-e? how many lanes does it (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299768)

Thunderbolt based on pci-e? how many lanes does it have?
can you boot from a add in card on the Thunderbolt pci-e bus?
can you link a video card in a pci-e box linked by Thunderbolt have it work good for games / cad and other stuff a add in video card can do?

No price tag? (1)

Galestar (1473827) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299790)

Seriously, how much do these things cost? Looks like they don't want you to know since they are probably a 50% markup over comparable laptops from other manufacturers.

Re:No price tag? (2)

LDAPMAN (930041) | more than 3 years ago | (#35300064)

Starting at:
13 inch $1199
15 inch $1799
17 inch $2499

The same as the old models and within a few buck of comparable models....if there were any.

Good Job Apple (-1, Troll)

Antisyzygy (1495469) | more than 3 years ago | (#35299808)

The effectively gutted the 13" line. They took out the added expense (and added functionality) of discrete graphics and are charging the same price as always. Trying to up their profit margin yet again. I don't understand why Apple can't actually try to compete with other manufacturers. Oh, wait, its because Apple-heads will buy anything they sell them at any cost.

Kickback from iSteve? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35299822)

Only explanation for CT posting an Apple Ad.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?