17 ms·
Color me disappointed. I was hoping for: • Ditching the optical media for longer battery life • 4 cores in the 13" • Max RAM of 12 GB (this one isn't listed
by wheels 16y ago
Color me disappointed. I was hoping for:
• Ditching the optical media for longer battery life
• 4 cores in the 13"
• Max RAM of 12 GB (this one isn't listed ... maybe?)
• The higher resolution 1440x900 resolution in the 13" that the Macbook Air has
Altogether it's a pretty wussy update. Basically it looks like the diff (on the 13" model, which is what I care about) is:
• Faster CPU (finally!)
• Thunderbolt port (count on buying another $30 display adapter like every generation)
• 3 hours less battery life
- nikster 16y agoI don't think it's less battery life - it's just measured more accurately. Love the quad core. Hate the CD drive - fill up that space with something useful, not a dead weight. I'd have to install an optibay adapter with SSD but I don't see why I'd want to to hack a brand new laptop.
- siglesias 16y ago>>• 3 hours less battery life The old battery tests were unrealistic. They advertised 8 hours on the 17'', but who really got even close to that under normal use? I'm thankful they're taking the hit on pure battery life numbers to report an honest, realistic test.
- wheels 16y agoI'd be surprised if that's what happened. I suspect this is just another unrealistic number that's the same proportion of reality as the previous numbers. That said, when I'm traveling and going for extended battery life (read: trans-atlantic flights) I get pretty close to the rated number by dimming my backlight and shutting off wifi and bluetooth.
- ericd 16y agoApple reported that they were changing the way they measured/reported battery life with the last MacBook air launch, and explained that it was less favorable, but more realistic.
- kenjackson 16y agoDuring transitions like this it would be nice to give both numbers on the new and old machines. This at least gives people some type of comparison point.
- nevinera 16y agoWhile that would be nice for the techie crowd, it would read to the typical user like "we were lying before, sorry about that". Not very feasible.
- bnastic 16y agoWell, I do get very close to 8 hours on my 17" MBP (when the cpu is not too stressed). That number will go down if any serious work is done, but light browsing etc. takes it all the way up to 8h.
- rdl 16y agoThe key I find with my mid 2010 17 is to manually force intel graphics. Several web browsers and plugins seem to invoke the NVidia discrete chip which sucks power.
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- damoncali 16y agoYep. My MBP, which was hte latest verison as of last week, gets about 3-4 hours on battery. Way less than they advertised. In the past they've been pretty reasonable. Not so much any more.
- younata 16y agoThey advertised 10 hours for my (now) last-gen MacBook pro. I can easily do 12 hours. And have. Screen brightness at minimum, using terminal.app. I prefer vim to any graphical editor (haven't tried emacs), and nethack is one of my favorite games ever. That's what I spend my long plane rides doing.
- MrFoof 16y agoI'm not sure if they're being more realistic. The previous MBPs had CPUs with a TDP of 35W. The TDP of the CPUs in the 2011 MBPs are 45W. Battery life seems to have dropped inline with the increase in power envelope. We should see improved battery life next year with Ivy Bridge, or if there's a mid-year refresh with Sandy Bridge processors with new steppings. Regardless, I plunked down for a 15" today so I could rid myself of the large brick my workplace saddled with me. They didn't believe me when I said I'd buy my own laptop with my own case. Hell, I meant it.
- wtallis 16y agoI think the TDP increase is mostly due to the integrated graphics being moved on to the CPU. Overall platform power usage should be lower than the previous generation.
- trotsky 16y agoThe increase in TDP mostly has to do with the increased GPU power - I think (speculating) that if you were running the 2010 CPU + the nvidia gpu hot for equivalent performance you'd be seeing at least as high a total power draw.
- rosser 16y agoMy 2010 15" MBP (i7, anti-glare upgrade) routinely gets 5-6+ hours on battery -- unless I'm doing something that causes the discrete GPU to kick in. Then, I'm lucky to get two hours.
- zcid 16y agoI can totally vouch for this. My 5,3 MBP only got about 4 hours max when brand new as long as I was running OS X and had the power-saving video mode selected. Running Debian, I usually see around 2 hours if I'm lucky.
- sandipc 16y agoI was really hoping the stock models would ditch hard drives entirely (for SSDs) like the MB Air.
- wheels 16y agoThe only reason I wasn't hoping for that is because I intend to stuff a 512 GB aftermarket SSD into my next MBP and I'd rather not pay through the nose for Apple's upgrade option.
- jasonrr 16y agoThey are only charging $1100-$1200 for the upgrade. Where are you getting a high-quality aftermarket 512GB SSD for much less than that (forget that you have to install it yourself)? edit: pricing differs slightly depending on model
- jarek 16y agoIs hard drive replacement in an MBP really difficult enough to warrant any mention when high-end SSDs are in play?
- stanmancan 16y agoNope. I got my 13" Macbook Pro in early January of this year and it took me a total of 10 minutes to replace the stock HDD with an SSD.
- robotresearcher 16y agoIf you ignore the hours of data copying or fresh install.
- dschobel 16y agothat's where lightpeak/thunderbolt steps in.
- pmjordan 16y agoI don't think the laptop versions of the Core i* have 3 memory channels (neither do the Socket-1155/1156 desktop versions), so 3x4GB of RAM would be a strange/suboptimal configuration. There probably isn't enough physical space in a 13" laptop for more than 2 modules anyway (unless you sacrifice battery or optical drive space). Even soldering them to the motherboard wouldn't save much space - I think all current 4GB modules use 16 DRAM chips. The move from Core2Duo to Core i* alone should bag you a substantial improvement in processing power, at least; the lack of a quad-core model is presumably a battery life and cooling system trade-off.
- Stormbringer 16y agoWasn't there a problem with some of the core processors? I don't remember which ones, but I'd check very carefully. Also worth checking out is what scale they are made at, I remember some of the core i processors were only being made at the higher nanometers scale (e.g. older less heat efficient technology). It would be ironic if the Core i5 four core model was more battery efficient and produced less heat than the core i5 two core models... Edit: no, I'm not referring to the recent thing with the sandy bridge architecture, but a previous architecture. Did some more research and it sounds like back in September some of them were produced at 32 nanometers and others were produced at 45 nanometers. Also there may have been some initial problems going to their new 32nm process. Presumably by now they've got the issues that I remembered sorted out (so that they can have new and different issues like sandy bridge ports and so forth).
- ericd 16y agoIt's the Sandy Bridge series (the affected one), but it was the chipsets that were affected, and that supposedly won't be a problem with these laptops.
- pmjordan 16y agoAll the new MacBook Pros use the latest "Sandy Bridge" generation CPUs. You can tell by the type of integrated GPU. There was a problem with the secondary SATA controller in the first revision of Intel's chipset for these CPUs. This has since been fixed, and also only surfaces in systems with more than 2 SATA ports.
- pclark 16y agoand a pony? :) (see: http://www.pragmaticmarketing.com/publications/magazine/6/4/you_cant_innovate_like_apple http://www.pragmaticmarketing.com/publications/magazine/6/4/... )
- strooltz 16y agostill looking for an "official" statement but i believe that the thunderbolt port may be backwards compatible with minidisplay. i would assume apple would change it's form if it were not, as to prevent users from accidentally plugging in incompatible devices. [updated] it is backwards compatible - source: http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/features.html http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/features.html
- ssharp 16y ago>Thunderbolt port (count on buying another $30 display adapter like every generation) Existing (edit: mini)displayport adapters will work. Per the Apple Thunderbolt site (http://www.apple.com/thunderbolt/ http://www.apple.com/thunderbolt/): "And because Thunderbolt is based on DisplayPort technology, the video standard for high-resolution displays, any Mini DisplayPort display plugs right into the Thunderbolt port. To connect a DisplayPort, DVI, HDMI, or VGA display, just use an existing adapter."
- stuff4ben 16y agoYes, and you can pick up a cheap $7 mini-display port to DVI connector from Monoprice.com. I'm using one now to connect my early 2010 MBP to an el-cheapo Dell 22" LCD.
- SeanLuke 16y agoWhat happens when you plug a Thunderbolt plug into a DisplayPort port?
- wmf 16y agoProbably nothing. If they're smart, they've made it physically not fit (like SAS into SATA).
- smokey_the_bear 16y agoIt's $100 for the mini-display port to dual-dvi, and it doesn't even work very well.
- ghshephard 16y agoI was scared away from purchasing a MacBook Pro with a Mini-Display Port just because of all the reviews on Apple.com saying how that converter was horrible. I'm happy I did, because it caused me to wait for a MacBook Air 13", and not only did I get a computer that is better for me (I really don't need all the features and power of the latest and greatest MBP) - They also seemed to have fixed the problems with the converter. I spend 10-12 hours a day with my MBAir 13" 1440x900and my Dell 2560x1600. The Converter works fine, I _love_ the mini-display port form factor, Happy to hear they are adapting it for thunderbolt, (Interesting to see the similarity in Bus Naming "FIRE WIRE" "THUNDER BOLT") - Only downside is that it requires a USB port to power it, but, on the pro side, the MBAir comes with two!
- hackermom 16y agoI almost choked on a sip of tea when I noticed that the 13" "Pro" is still stuck with a 1280*800 display. Talk about boneheaded move.
- kbutler 16y agoMarket segmentation.
- jarek 16y agoYeah. It segments away people who want more than 113 dpi in a sub-5 lb laptop with a hard drive larger than 256 GB quite effectively.
- dlevine 16y agoWhy is that a boneheaded move? I think that 1280x800 fits plenty of information on a 13" screen. I usually run an external display for more space. If anything, 1400x900 on the new MBA seems a little bit small (and Apple doesn't allow you to bump the size of everything up like you can in Windows). It's interesting that 1680x1050 is still an upcharge on the 15".
- jarek 16y ago> Why is that a boneheaded move? Because people want higher resolutions without using an external display. Or at least a choice.
- AJ007 16y agoThe fact that a 1920x1080 is only available on a single production laptop, the Sony Vaio Z and a small number of 17" laptops (possibly some 16"ers too) makes me suspect that the market for high resolution screens is very slim. The best I can tell, the availability of high resolution screens on laptops has actually dropped over the past few years rather than increased. It seems rare now that screen resolution is even an option on laptops. Personally I'm one of the people who is in the market for high resolution laptop screens. Unfortunately its a choice between high resolution and durability or size. I'm never traveling with a 17" screen again and I don't really want a poorly engineered Vaio Z.
- pclark 16y agoTo add to your list: 3G internet.
- CountSessine 16y agoYeah, why not? Among top tier laptop and cellphone manufacturers, the only name that appears on both lists is Apple (well, I guess Samsung makes laptops too...). Adding a SIM/RUIM slot and a 3G chip makes so much sense. I know a lot of laptop manufacturers in Europe have offered this as an option. Why not Apple?
- samatman 16y agoBecause it's more profitable for Apple if you get your 3G from a tethered iPhone?
- Splines 16y agoMaybe more profitable for AT&T. It's not like you're not going to buy an iPhone because they add 3G to their laptops.
- kooshball 16y agowhy would it be tethering be profitable for Apple? AFAIK they do not get a cut of the tethering charge from providers.
- sandyc 16y agoBecause then you have to buy an iPhone (and proprietary cables, and then you might find some fun apps etc.)
- danudey 16y agoBecause most people don't want to pay for two 3G data plans, and the types of people who would want 3G connectivity on their laptops probably have 3G smartphones with tethering already.
- mgrouchy 16y agoThe main thing that bothers me in your list that I was really hoping for, was the better resolution on the 13inch. boo.
- meric 16y agoI am still waiting for a 13" Macbook Air with an Apple ARM processor, 10 hours of battery, RAM upgradeable to 8GB and 512gb SSD drive by default, for less than $1500. Hopefully it'll be out in a year. Maybe two. Lugging around my Core2Duo MBP weighing at over 2kg does get quite tiring. :( I need its battery life though.
- tesseract 16y ago> Ditching the optical media for longer battery life I doubt the optical drive uses any significant power at all when it's not in use. That said, I ditched my own in favor of an SSD + HDD setup and haven't looked back.
- astrodust 16y agoI think what's meant is using that space for battery and not a useless optical drive.
- russell_h 16y agoI think he meant (or this is certainly what I was hoping for) that removing the optical bay would leave space for a much larger battery.
- tesseract 16y agoAh, that makes more sense. Although a battery is a lot denser than an optical drive, so that would kick the system weight up. If you use some of the space gained to instead make the system thinner, you start to get essentially a Macbook Air. And I think it's fairly clear that Apple is moving in the direction of converging the Air and the 13" MBP.
- davidhperry 16y agoTotally agreed on ditching optical media. I'm also wondering when they'll get around to adding mobile broadband support.
- elithrar 16y agoThat they kept the optical drives wasn't a surprise. For most of us (power-users) — who download software and/or use disk images — it's not a necessity, but a lot of regular Joe's still burn CD's/DVD's. I've had a lot of people look at a MacBook Air and then ask me "where's the DVD drive?".
- zcid 16y agoApple could easily leverage this to their advantage by selling an optional external drive and marketing it appropriately. Or they could design the bay to accommodate an optional battery that would be factory installed.
- kondro 16y agoThe battery life score is based on Apple's new battery tests. 50% screen brightness whilst browsing 30 websites (including flash) in a normal fashion until the battery dies.