new the "new" macbook pro 13

okay, apple again disappointed me with their new macbook pro 13 that they released on tuesday.
i mean c'mon core 2 again? and nVidia INTERGRATED 320M not even GT 320M.
im not going to pay for this outdated piece for 1199.99+tax and shipping.

so my question is when do u think apple's going to release next version?
with i3 and better dedicated graphic, hopely.

i mean, a year later it is obivous that they gonna put i3
but could it be in 6 months?
share ur thoughts

and considering buying 15 instead but the weight is my most conderation
currently my laptop is 3.7 pounds (UL30V-1X) and 15 is like 5.7?

 

They most likely won't put a dedicated graphics chip into the MBP 13. It creates too much heat and uses too much power. They'd have to develop a better fan at the very least for it, and as the battery is one of the main selling points, they'd be reluctant to reduce it.

There is another problem, with the integrated chips. You see, there is a legal dispute between Intel and nVidia at the moment, about nVidia making chipsets for Intel processors. So for the moment, nVidia can't make any integrated chips for i3/i5/i7 processors. Which means Apple would have to use the crappy Intel GMAs that come with the processors.

Apple has learnt in the past that their users would prefer a slightly weaker processor but much better graphics power.

Until that legal dispute is settled, or until Apple decide to use a dedicated chip in the 13" MBP, I don't think they'll be moving processors. Perhaps when Sandy Bridge comes along with much more powerful IGPs.

 

I mean can't you tell what they are up to from the products they have been releasing?
You are still hoping for good stuff?
I thought people can only be tricked once?

 

After buying a mbp 13" on June, I'm really dissapointed that apple didn't beef the spec more for the price; I won't be buying another I don't think (I love my current one however, just not worth the money in these cash flow times)

 

Read this...
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=475798

 

The internet truly is an incredible place.

After 3 months of people guessing on when the new MBP's were going to come out, and subsequently all being wrong 95% of the time... They have now come out, and not even 48 hours later there are threads about when the *next* refresh is coming.

Mind boggling.
Probably not before Christmas, is my 2 cents.

 

Reminds me of girls who get cheated by guys and keep trusting them all the more.

 

I wasn't wrong. It came out next Tuesday. You can check my posts.

 

LOL, was just thinking that .. and I was right too when I said before christmas 2010

 

Look on the bright side - your current system stays almost state of the art and you save a lot of money upgrading ;-)

Apple has major updates on most hardware about every 12 months with more minor updates at about 6 months.

If you looked at this update as a minor one, there could potentially be a larger one late this year in time for the holidays. More likely you are looking at early next year for a major upgrade but you never know.

 

I have the 15" model, it is like carrying around a brick or tank but still a great laptop if you do not have to carry away from the desk or run it unplugged.

 

oops...wrong forum

 

got me laughing at work cheer.

 

Ok, I think the problem with the new MBP13 is that a discrete card would be too hot for the small frame, so Apple went with integrated.

Well, Nvidia isn't making integrated chips for the Core i Series. So what happens is that your stuck with the Core 2 Series.

 

Not only would a discrete card be a heat issue in the chassis of a 13 in MBP, I honestly think Apple keeps some separation between the 13 in and the 15 in. People seem more likely to drop some money on discrete graphics and new core processors, which means they're going to pay more.

Gotta pad that bottom line.

 

Sony did it no problem on the Vaio Z and cut 1.5lb out of the package (means the 13" MBP weighs 50% more). HP dropped a quadcore i7 + discrete video card in a package just as thin on the Envy 15. Essentially you're saying Apple's world class design engineers couldn't tackle a problem that HP was able to do w/ the guys that spend most of their time churning out 15lb behemoths.

Apple looked at their marketing data and figured people would still pay that premium to get in the MBP Pro line so they kept going with it. No reason to giveaway performance when you don't have to.

NVidia isn't making integrated b/c they don't have the license from Intel and Intel's not in the mood of selling it to them at this point and NVidia will have to deal w/ selling a couple fewer chips to OEM's.

 

The sony is nearly $2000 and is 1.3" thick. The Envy doesn't have a disc drive (space saved) and isn't as thin as the Macbook Pros .95" dimension.

The Envy 15 and the Sony Z aren't even the same laptops as the MBP13. You suggest that Apple looked at their marketing and figured people would pay up? So its ok for Sony to charge $2k for their 13" but people call foul when they can't get the same performance for the MBP13 and expect to pay the same $1200 price?

Doesn't make sense to me.

 

As impressive the high end Z is, (I own an older model and love it) I don't think it is a fair comparison for the entry level Macbook Pro.

Also with the exception of the higher end, better engineered and expensive models like the Z, other 13 inchers with the i5 or i7 - within the price range of the 13 inch Macbook, will probably have 2 hours of battery life and will be hot enough to boil your manhood.

 

no joke, the sony Z is the single most sexy notebook in the world. I would buy it if i had the cash.

 

There's an article here that comes to the iffy conclusion that a Core 2 Duo was "the only choice" if Apple wanted to maintain the "extended battery life" and also due to "size constraints."

Of course, ASUS managed to fit a Core i3 in the U30Jc, which is every bit as "size constrained" as the 13" MBP. And it gets better battery life despite having a more powerful GPU thanks to nVidia's Optimus (which admittedly might be Windows-exclusive). Oh yeah, not to mention that machine is $400 less and has a higher-resolution screen. The decision to put a Core 2 Duo in the "new" 13" MBP was marketing one, pure and simple. If the 13" is simply not a choice, which it effectively isn't, Apple will sell more 15" MBPs. Because Steve knows that Apple fans will buy Apple at any cost, even if the competition has a better machine at a lower cost.

You can't begrudge a for-profit company too much for looking at the bottom dollar. I just wish people would stop trying to defend it as anything else.

 

Already been addressed in the other thread. See here:
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/04/why-the-13-macbook-pro-didnt-get-a-core-i5-upgrade.ars

It would have been a costly redesign, and it's very likely true that it would have forced Apple to lower battery capacity.

 

Does the U30JC get better battery life? If it does it can't be much more than the MBP13 because its now rated at 10hrs.

Also the U30JC is size constrained, but not nearly as much as the .95" thin MBP. Apple probably could of fit an i3 and discrete gpu in the the MBP13, but I don't think anyone will ever know.

 

That's the part that kind of makes me pause a bit too. The weight difference isn't drastic (0.3 LBS) and the MBP 13 is only a little thinner.

But as I've said in another thread, the aluminum unibody and the screen quality is where I give the MBP more points

 

I agree, I got to play with my uncle's new 2010 13 Macbook Pro and the display is very good. Almost as good as my Z. Most of the 13 inch notebooks in the price range of the entry level MBP usually have mediocre quality screens.