Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Hardware - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Mac Notebooks > Any updates to Macbook Pro coming?

Any updates to Macbook Pro coming?
Thread Tools
mi_canuck
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 28, 2007, 10:17 AM
 
Thinking of getting a Macbook Pro (15"). There's a some on the refurb site at a decent price. So I'm thinking about either a refurb or maybe a brand new base model configured to what I want (7200rpm 160gb drive, glossy screen). (btw - is apple care worth it? - or could i hold off and buy right before the 1yr warranty is up?)


But just wondering with the announcement of Leopard - will there soon be an update to the Macbook Pro?




cheers
     
MacosNerd
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 28, 2007, 10:27 AM
 
Maybe at MWSF, in January. I don't think you'll see anything this year.

Yes applecare is well worth the expense. The cost of a single repair of a laptop will far exceed the cost of the extended warranty. Of course if you don't think you'll be holding on to the computer for more then a year, you could skip it, but for laptops its generally a good idea.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 28, 2007, 11:04 AM
 
Intel will release the mobile Penryn early next year: the 2.4 GHz Merom T7700 will be replaced by the 2.6 GHz Penryn T9500 (lower TDP, SSE4). If Apple doesn't update the MBP then (this could be announced at MWSF), they'll do it towards the middle of 2008 when Intel launches the new Cantiga chipset (1067 MT/s FSB, support for DDR3 RAM) and the 2.8 GHz Penryn along with it.

Re: AppleCare, if you're planning on keeping your mobile Mac for more than a year you should definitely consider it. Repairs on MB(P)s are very expensive (lots of labor, expensive replacement parts). Also if you plan on selling it after regular warranty has expired AC will increase resale value.
     
mi_canuck  (op)
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 12:12 AM
 
OK - thanks for the replies!

How about glossy vs matte? I was in a Apple Store today, and quite frankly, the glare/reflection off of the glossy screen seemed to far outweigh any extra colour saturation the glossy provides. I think I'd lean towards the matte - because I have a feeling the reflections off the glossy screen would be way too distracting and drive me crazy in the long run.

What's the consensus on glossy vs matte? I don't really plan to do much video other than maybe the odd movie. More Photoshop/Aperture/Lightroom, and typical web browsing/email/productivity apps, etc.



thanks!
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 04:45 AM
 
There have been enough threads on the glossy vs. matte issue already. Try a search.
     
Felix
Forum Regular
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Zuerich Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 06:06 AM
 
I guess user-significant updates would be such as

Blu-ray/HD-DVD drive. Until the prevailing format has been found or combo-drives are available, may be not worth waiting for. You may end up with the "wrong" format.

Screen-resolution independent user interface: it is said that the delveloper tools of 10.5 contain tools for an entirely screen-resolution-independent interface - this could lead to the adoption of high resolution displays (150 dpi, 200 dpi) while maintaining aedequately sized icons/windows. Would be intriguing (in particular in combination with above), but the present display (I ended up with matte - glossy was not available anyways on my student discount program, but I guess I woudl have chosen matte) is already quite amazing.

Everyting else, I see very little reason to wait for any upgrades, you can always install bigger, faster HDs as they become available. With the new 10.5 would will be up-to-date for the next 12-18 months.

Felix
2007 MacBook Pro 2.4 4 GByte RAM 320/7000 HD
2000 Powerbook Pismo G3 500 MHz, 640 MByte RAM, 40 GByte HD, Airport, NewerTech Battery, integrated DVD/CD-R(W) running Mac OS 10.4.11
     
SEkker
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: May 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 10:13 AM
 
Applecare is a terrific tool for keeping your MBP running at 100% beyond the first year.

I have used Applecare to deal with dead pixels on a PB17, and defective power chargers on a PB12.

As for upgrades, there are clear signs of incremental upgrades to the hardware - slightly faster CPUs as early as Jan, maybe bigger hard drives for the money, maybe a blu-ray optical drive option. Software jump was made with 10.5 - but without the super cool font controller rumored to be a big part of 10.5 (which did not appear at first glance), I do not think we're going to see any special new displays. Maybe we'll see that in 10.6.

If a MBP is a good option for you, then either get it now and enjoy it, or wait until jan and see what upgrades are in store. You could even wait to see what Apple does to update the macbook - some rumors have it as early as tomorrow.
     
SierraDragon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 04:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by SEkker View Post
Applecare is a terrific tool for keeping your MBP running at 100% beyond the first year.
I will offer an opposing viewpoint. At US$349 AppleCare is a very expensive way to add warranty to years 2 and 3 of a MBP's life. Most warranted failures occur in (free coverage) year one, and most of what does occur in years 2-3 either is not covered (e.g. damage, theft) or can be performed for less than $349 with newer/better replacement parts anyway (e.g. hard drive failure). Better IMO is to put that $349 aside to contribute to your next laptop purchase.

Note that I just saw on another thread a fellow debating between 2 used aluminum G4 Powerbooks: price range $300-375. Buying AppleCare that starts after a box is already a year old, one is by definition insuring a box when it is already becoming tech obsolete and is losing value fast.

Mac pro laptops do not fail at anywhere near the rate in years 2 and 3 that would justify $349 for insurance on a year-old box.

No problem waiting until the end of year one if one does want AppleCare. Apple will email you multiple times reminding you that you can still buy AppleCare. Apple probably makes much more money on AppleCare than on any other product...

-Allen Wicks
( Last edited by SierraDragon; Oct 29, 2007 at 05:04 PM. )
     
SierraDragon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 05:13 PM
 
Unlike Mac Pros, MBPs are pretty current in their tech. I doubt if we will see anything before Mac Expo SF in January. Refurbs of current models IMO are usually good purchase choices, just inspect carefully, esp. look for dead pixels and/or warped screens.

-Allen Wicks
     
Cliff_O
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Livermore, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 05:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by SierraDragon View Post
Most warranted failures occur in (free coverage) year one, and most of what does occur in years 2-3 either is not covered (e.g. damage, theft) or can be performed for less than $349 with newer/better replacement parts anyway (e.g. hard drive failure).
That was not my experience with my PB15 which had its system board, display, and hard drive all replaced well after the first year under applecare coverage. I have little doubt that the cost of replacing these components would have far exceeded the cost of the warranty.
MBP 15" - 2.33Ghz C2D-3GB RAM-120GB HD
PB 15"-1.25GHz G4-1.5GB RAM-80GB HD-Superdrive
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 05:28 PM
 
There's no doubt there. A new MLB is about $700. Labor is north of $100.

If you ever need serious reapir AC will pay off at least once.
     
SierraDragon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 10:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cliff_O View Post
That was not my experience with my PB15 which had its system board, display, and hard drive all replaced well after the first year under applecare coverage. I have little doubt that the cost of replacing these components would have far exceeded the cost of the warranty.
Of course if you suffer a major failure like mobo or display in years 2-3 AppleCare is cost effective. But the odds of years 2-3 covered catastrophe would have to be something like 1-in-4 to justify the $349 prepayment. You tell me what the odds are, but if you think they are 1-in-4 you better share what you are smoking. My guess is that the odds of a major covered catastrophe during years 2-3 are closer to 1-in-50 than to 1-in-4.

By all means folks should buy AppleCare for their MBPs if it makes them feel good, and many do. That's good for the rest of us as Apple gets richer and can afford to design cool new products. But puh-leaze do not tell me that, overall, $349 AppleCare is cost effective for a MBP consumer.

Buy a top Mac Pro and a couple of displays for $8,000+ and the math changes. $249 covering $8000 of hardware (including 4 hard drives and 2 displays) makes a lot more sense than $349 covering $2500 of hardware with just one hard drive and one display. Probably still not truly cost effective, but often worth it for other reasons.

-Allen Wicks
( Last edited by SierraDragon; Oct 29, 2007 at 10:48 PM. )
     
Cliff_O
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Livermore, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 11:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by SierraDragon View Post
Of course if you suffer a major failure like mobo or display in years 2-3 AppleCare is cost effective. But the odds of years 2-3 covered catastrophe would have to be something like 1-in-4 to justify the $349 prepayment. You tell me what the odds are, but if you think they are 1-in-4 you better share what you are smoking. My guess is that the odds of a major covered catastrophe during years 2-3 are closer to 1-in-50 than to 1-in-4.
For me, the odds were 100% - one PB, one PB with a dead mobo, hard drive and display. Spin that however you like.
MBP 15" - 2.33Ghz C2D-3GB RAM-120GB HD
PB 15"-1.25GHz G4-1.5GB RAM-80GB HD-Superdrive
     
mi_canuck  (op)
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 31, 2007, 05:06 PM
 
Here's another question - well a couple....

1) If I won't be doing video, is the 256MB video card worth it over the 128MB video card?

2) Is the 7200 RPM 160GB hard drive a worthy upgrade? ie. does disk speed make a huge difference in perceived speed on a MacBook Pro?


thnx!!!
     
mfbernstein
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Jose
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 31, 2007, 05:13 PM
 
Other than games, video and very select graphics apps (Aperture for instance), the extra 128MB on the video card will make no real-world difference.

The 7200RPM HD on the other hand is a substantial improvement. Depending how much it costs, you might also give a thought to buying a drive separately and having a certified tech do the upgrade.
     
romeosc
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Memphis, Tn. USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 31, 2007, 07:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cliff_O View Post
For me, the odds were 100% - one PB, one PB with a dead mobo, hard drive and display. Spin that however you like.
I have had 23 Powerbooks and not one that needed AppleCare! I have had a couple of Sfeware claims (I have been LUCKY!)

I have save a lot of money!

I self insure......
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2007, 05:24 AM
 
Originally Posted by mi_canuck View Post
1) If I won't be doing video, is the 256MB video card worth it over the 128MB video card?
Games will likely see a benefit too. And it will help if you plan on attaching a large external display (I got it mainly for that reason). And keep in mind that this is one of those upgrades you can't do later on - you're stuck forever with what you buy now. That said, if you don't do things like Aperture, Quake, or Doom, and you're only using the internal screen you'll be perfectly happy with the 128 MB VRAM.

2) Is the 7200 RPM 160GB hard drive a worthy upgrade? ie. does disk speed make a huge difference in perceived speed on a MacBook Pro?
The faster disk speed does make a difference, but you're not going to notice it with small file transfers. Large copies, boot time, and app launch time are when you'll notice the difference. OTOH I've always felt the difference going from 4200 rpm to 5400 rpm was more pronounced than from 5400 to 7200 - but maybe that's just me. IMHO the real issue is where to get it from. If you simply don't want any hassle and capacity's not an issue, get the BTO 160 GB 7200 rpm upgrade from Apple (that's what I did - lazy me). OTOH you can get 2.5" 200 GB 7200 rpm HDDs for a little more than $200 elsewhere. As long as you have an AASP put it in, your MBP's warranty is still good.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2007, 07:32 AM
 
Silent MBP update today

• new BTO option: 2.6 GHz Merom XE X7800, $250
• new BTO option: 250 GB 5400 rpm HDD, $150
( Last edited by Simon; Nov 1, 2007 at 12:44 PM. )
     
ninahagen
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2007, 08:01 AM
 
Don't forget the other BTO: a 200 GB 7200 rpm drive for $200 Sweet.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2007, 08:04 AM
 
Yeah, you're right. Missed that one. Good stuff.
     
JoshuaZ
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Yamanashi, Japan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2007, 08:39 AM
 
Well damn. Those are some nice options. But man do you pay for them. Big time.
     
mfbernstein
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Jose
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2007, 08:52 AM
 
The HD is about what you'd pay on the open market. Granted, you'd keep the original too in that case. The Merom XE isn't cheap, but Intel themselves charge a hefty premium on the higher-end processors.
     
mi_canuck  (op)
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2007, 08:55 AM
 
Originally Posted by ninahagen View Post
Don't forget the other BTO: a 200 GB 7200 rpm drive for $200 Sweet.
thnks for pointing these new silent changes out!! sweet indeed!! i might just bite the bullet today...

question is - 250GB 5400 rpm, vs 200GB 7200 rpm.... hmmmm...... (space vs speed)....

Reliability-wise, which would be more robust? the 250/5400 or the 200/7200? anyone know which brand each is?


cheers
     
ninahagen
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2007, 10:57 AM
 
Originally Posted by mi_canuck View Post
thnks for pointing these new silent changes out!! sweet indeed!! i might just bite the bullet today...

question is - 250GB 5400 rpm, vs 200GB 7200 rpm.... hmmmm...... (space vs speed)....

Reliability-wise, which would be more robust? the 250/5400 or the 200/7200?
Well, if you are straining with 200 GB of capacity, you will soon be straining at 250GB, and need to go external anyway, so I say go with speed. No question on the Meron processor either if you can afford it. As to reliability, both will be fine, as neither pushes the edge of the speed envelope (10k rpm SATA/15k rpm SAS). Besides, if you get Applecare (and you should, no, must), any HD problem for the first year will be fixed free.

Have fun, and let us know what you do...
     
Cliff_O
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Livermore, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2007, 11:47 AM
 
Originally Posted by mi_canuck View Post
thnks for pointing these new silent changes out!! sweet indeed!! i might just bite the bullet today...

question is - 250GB 5400 rpm, vs 200GB 7200 rpm.... hmmmm...... (space vs speed)....

Reliability-wise, which would be more robust? the 250/5400 or the 200/7200? anyone know which brand each is?


cheers
I doubt there's much difference with respect to reliability. The power consumption of each drive would be a more interesting characteristic to compare. Personally I would opt for the faster drive and look to external storage when increased capacity is required.

Photography is one of my hobbies and it's not unusual for me to shoot 12-16GB of images at an event. It doesn't take too many events before the internal drive runs out of room. I usually move the image files off to external storage (which in my case are drives that are accessible either as Airport disks or directly via eSATA depending on what I need to do) once I'm done with the initial processing of them.
MBP 15" - 2.33Ghz C2D-3GB RAM-120GB HD
PB 15"-1.25GHz G4-1.5GB RAM-80GB HD-Superdrive
     
mi_canuck  (op)
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2007, 12:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cliff_O View Post
I doubt there's much difference with respect to reliability. The power consumption of each drive would be a more interesting characteristic to compare. Personally I would opt for the faster drive and look to external storage when increased capacity is required.

Photography is one of my hobbies and it's not unusual for me to shoot 12-16GB of images at an event. It doesn't take too many events before the internal drive runs out of room. I usually move the image files off to external storage (which in my case are drives that are accessible either as Airport disks or directly via eSATA depending on what I need to do) once I'm done with the initial processing of them.
Makes sense - I think the 200GB 7200 would be the better way to go.

Since you do a lot of photography - do you see much value in either the 256MB video card, or even the 2.6GHz processor? I do a lot of photography as well - more on an amateur level (Canon 20D shooting RAW/JPEG takes up a lot of space) - so wondering if the video and processor upgrades (256MB/2.6GHz vs 128MB/2.2Ghz) are worth it for Photoshop/Aperture/LightRoom/ usage, or if the money (close to $700 difference) would be better spent on extra storage.


thnx
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2007, 12:46 PM
 
Originally Posted by ninahagen View Post
Well, if you are straining with 200 GB of capacity, you will soon be straining at 250GB, and need to go external anyway, so I say go with speed. No question on the Meron processor either if you can afford it.
Also people need to keep in mind that a 7200rpm disk can be slower than a 5400rpm disk in real world benchmarks if the former is almost full while the latter still has lots of free space. But I agree with this notion that if you're filling the disk up anyway, you might as well go for the fastest you can get and then make up for the extra needed capacity with a fast external drive.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2007, 12:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by JoshuaZ View Post
Well damn. Those are some nice options. But man do you pay for them. Big time.
The Merom XE is a good deal. The 1k price difference is $214 from T7700 to X7800. The HDD isn't quite as good. I'm guessing Apple gets the 200 GB drive for well below $200 but the 160 GB drive is going to cost them quite a bit more than just $50.
     
Cliff_O
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Livermore, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2007, 01:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by mi_canuck View Post
Makes sense - I think the 200GB 7200 would be the better way to go.

Since you do a lot of photography - do you see much value in either the 256MB video card, or even the 2.6GHz processor? I do a lot of photography as well - more on an amateur level (Canon 20D shooting RAW/JPEG takes up a lot of space) - so wondering if the video and processor upgrades (256MB/2.6GHz vs 128MB/2.2Ghz) are worth it for Photoshop/Aperture/LightRoom/ usage, or if the money (close to $700 difference) would be better spent on extra storage.


thnx
I don't have any experience with Aperture, but from I've read, it seems to be happier on Mac Pro class hardware. I use Lightroom and CS3 under Tiger. I quickly reverted to Tiger after upgrading to Leopard because of critical Lightroom incompatibilities. I am a Nikon D2X shooter. To provide an example of shooting volume, the last event I shot (a BMW car club autocross on the 21st) produced approximately 1000 captures that consumed around 10GB of storage.

RAM is maxed out on my MBP at 3GB and Lightroom is a very big RAM user at around 1GB usage of physical RAM. The 2.33 C2D CPU has been more than adequate and the ATI video card in the machine seems fine. I have mostly been using the MBP's internal display, but I have a 23" Apple monitor on order. I also finally broke down and ordered a color calibration hw/sw bundle from Xrite. I like the portability of the 15" MBP and have travelled internationally with it.

After RAM, moving data through the machine seems to be the biggest bottleneck. I use a Sandisk FW800 CF reader to get data into the machine. I initially process images on the local drive, then move them off onto external storage via an expressbus eSATA card from Sonnet. The same drives are connected via USB as Airport disks when they're not connected locally via eSATA. If I am only touching an image or two, then accessing them via wireless is fine. For big jobs, I connect directly to the external drives. FW800 would be an OK alternative if cost is an issue, but 3Gbps from eSATA is screaming fast.
( Last edited by Cliff_O; Nov 1, 2007 at 01:58 PM. Reason: clarify)
MBP 15" - 2.33Ghz C2D-3GB RAM-120GB HD
PB 15"-1.25GHz G4-1.5GB RAM-80GB HD-Superdrive
     
dm294
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Nov 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2007, 06:04 PM
 
So..I finally made the dive and ordered my new MBP last week. I've been waiting very impatiently for it to arrive, and I finally received an ETA of Monday morning at 10:00. I got what was top of the line at the time...and now I see that they made the silent upgrade. Why couldn't they have done this last week?? As my laptop was CTO, am I right in assuming that I can't return it? Even if I could, I don't know if I can handle waiting another two weeks for the new one to arrive. Oh Apple...why do you tease me so?
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2007, 06:58 PM
 
WD just announced 320GB/5400RPM drives.

Originally Posted by dm294 View Post
So..I finally made the dive and ordered my new MBP last week. I've been waiting very impatiently for it to arrive, and I finally received an ETA of Monday morning at 10:00. I got what was top of the line at the time...and now I see that they made the silent upgrade. Why couldn't they have done this last week?? As my laptop was CTO, am I right in assuming that I can't return it? Even if I could, I don't know if I can handle waiting another two weeks for the new one to arrive. Oh Apple...why do you tease me so?
What silent upgrade? All they did was add new CTO options.
     
dm294
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Nov 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2007, 07:09 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
WD just announced 320GB/5400RPM drives.



What silent upgrade? All they did was add new CTO options.
That's what I was referring to. Another user in this post referred to it as an upgrade. Sorry if my terminology was wrong. All I meant was that I would have liked to take advantage of the new options, and it is a little aggravating that they became available while I was awaiting delivery of my new macbook pro.
     
turnedge762
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2007, 10:52 PM
 
Yeah, unfortunately you can't return a CTO.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 2, 2007, 05:13 AM
 
Originally Posted by dm294 View Post
All I meant was that I would have liked to take advantage of the new options, and it is a little aggravating that they became available while I was awaiting delivery of my new macbook pro.
Which BTO are you interested in? If it's about the HDD, just get the new drive you want, have an AASP put it in there and sell off the 'old' drive. OTOH if you want the Merom XE you'd have to sell the entire MBP and get a new one. The Merom XE will no doubt offer more performance, but I seriously doubt the hassle and additional cost you'd have to get it are worth the 8% CPU performance increase.
     
vm7118
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Nov 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2007, 10:17 AM
 
you can call apple support and request a partial refund (the price difference) if your laptop would cost less if you ordered it now. several over at macrumors have done so with good results.
     
mi_canuck  (op)
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2007, 03:33 PM
 
Thanks for all the feedback. Ordered a base MBP 15" w/ 2.2GHz, 128MB vid, and 200GB 7200 rpm drive. Got the matte screen too. Plenty for what I'll be doing/needing. The 7200rpm drive pushes the delivery to 2-3 weeks, but it's worth the extra wait imo. Looking forward to when it gets here!


cheers
     
wubrew
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Port Angeles, WA.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 7, 2007, 11:15 PM
 
Originally Posted by mi_canuck View Post
Thanks for all the feedback. Ordered a base MBP 15" w/ 2.2GHz, 128MB vid, and 200GB 7200 rpm drive. Got the matte screen too. Plenty for what I'll be doing/needing. The 7200rpm drive pushes the delivery to 2-3 weeks, but it's worth the extra wait imo. Looking forward to when it gets here!


cheers
WAIT
According to this guy the next generation MBP is here and he want to have one.

http://forums.macnn.com/69/macbook-p...o/#post3528083
It's "Brewed" not "Juiced"
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 8, 2007, 04:06 AM
 
Originally Posted by wubrew View Post
According to this guy the next generation MBP is here and he want to have one.
It's still the exact same MBP. The difference is that you now have a BTO option for the 2.6 GHz Merom XE X7800.
     
JoshuaZ
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Yamanashi, Japan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 8, 2007, 10:02 AM
 
Wow. What a price jump for the extra 2ghz. Damn...
     
DKeithA
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Pittsboro, NC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 8, 2007, 03:38 PM
 
yes, it is beyond unreasonable.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 8, 2007, 04:22 PM
 
At least Apple's being fair about it.

According to Intel's 1k prices T7700 -> X7800 costs $214. Apple charges $250.

If you could go to the 2.8 GHz X7900, Intel would charge you another $280 on top of that.
     
mfbernstein
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Jose
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 8, 2007, 05:29 PM
 
Doubtful that Apple is paying standard Intel bulk prices. Then again, why do people pay for 2.4GHZ over 2.2? Presumably the same logic applies...
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 8, 2007, 07:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by mfbernstein View Post
Doubtful that Apple is paying standard Intel bulk prices.
iSuppli's analysis (estimate?) said Apple pays 13% under Intel's 1Ku pricing.

Originally Posted by mfbernstein View Post
Then again, why do people pay for 2.4GHZ over 2.2? Presumably the same logic applies...
Increased VRAM.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 9, 2007, 03:56 AM
 
Originally Posted by mfbernstein View Post
Doubtful that Apple is paying standard Intel bulk prices.
It's not doubtful, it's certain.

Apple is getting a discount that depends on volume. Hence while they get maybe 13% on the 2.4 GHz models, they're getting considerably less on the 2.6 GHz parts. Let's assume 9%. In then end the upgrade price is almost identical.

T7700 -> X7800: $482 - $275 = $207 ($7 difference compared to 1k prices). You pay $250. Not bad.

Then again, why do people pay for 2.4GHZ over 2.2? Presumably the same logic applies...
Well people are paying those $500 for more than just 200 MHz. And besides, this is nothing but normal in this market. Prices scale well with clock rates (or capacity when it comes to RAM or disks) in the middle of the market. But once you go to the top notch part you always pay considerably more. Less CPUs pass at high clock rates. Supply and demand, simple as that. The fact that you can get a 2.2 GHz Merom for so little has a lot to do with the fact that there are quite a few geeks willing to pay almost a thousand bucks for the top end Merom XE.
     
mfbernstein
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Jose
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 9, 2007, 10:32 AM
 
Originally Posted by Simon View Post
It's not doubtful, it's certain.

Apple is getting a discount that depends on volume. Hence while they get maybe 13% on the 2.4 GHz models, they're getting considerably less on the 2.6 GHz parts. Let's assume 9%. In then end the upgrade price is almost identical.
You're speculating. I'm speculating. That's why the term _doubtful_ applies. Unless you have inside sources of course... In any case, we agree: the premium Apple charges on the high-end probably isn't that far out of line with what they're paying.

Originally Posted by Simon View Post
Well people are paying those $500 for more than just 200 MHz. And besides, this is nothing but normal in this market. Prices scale well with clock rates (or capacity when it comes to RAM or disks) in the middle of the market. But once you go to the top notch part you always pay considerably more. Less CPUs pass at high clock rates. Supply and demand, simple as that. The fact that you can get a 2.2 GHz Merom for so little has a lot to do with the fact that there are quite a few geeks willing to pay almost a thousand bucks for the top end Merom XE.
I didn't say it was wrong. I said it was the same sort of logic. If you'll pay $500 for 200MHZ, 40GB of disk space and 128MB more of VRAM, you'll likely pay $250 more for another 200MHZ.

I happen to be of the school of thought that an extra $500 to spend in a year or two on a new machine goes a lot farther, performance-wise, but clearly for others, that's not a consideration.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 9, 2007, 11:06 AM
 
Originally Posted by mfbernstein View Post
You're speculating. I'm speculating. That's why the term _doubtful_ applies.
I think I wasn't quite clear. What is certain is that Apple is not paying 1k prices. I agree with you though, that we can only speculate what the exact discount rates are.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 9, 2007, 07:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by Simon View Post
Less CPUs pass at high clock rates. Supply and demand, simple as that. The fact that you can get a 2.2 GHz Merom for so little has a lot to do with the fact that there are quite a few geeks willing to pay almost a thousand bucks for the top end Merom XE.
Intel isn't having much trouble making clockrate these days (the desktop Core 2s easily overclock 20% on air, 30+% on liquid), the problem is power. Power puts a practical limit to the maximum clockrate they can sell, and due to market dynamics they're able to add a significant markup to the top clockrate chips as you mentioned.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 10, 2007, 03:18 AM
 
On a side note, Intel no longer advertises the X7800 Merom XE. The only Merom XE now being sold as Core 2 Extreme is the X7900 at 2.8 GHz (the model in the iMac). The X7800 is now called Merom T7800 and has become a 'regular' Core 2 Duo processor.

This is just marketing. But the good news is that the T7800 sold today has a 35W TDP like the T7700 at launch which is a lot less than the initial Merom XE TDP (44W at launch). Needless to say this is why it's now a BTO option on the MBP.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 10, 2007, 11:34 AM
 
Yea, they switched the 7800 to the G0 stepping instead of E1, which cut the power consumption by those last couple watts.

n.b. Intel's TDP figures are a guideline for the entire processor line; the X7800 may have only been producing 38W before, but that put it above the C2D mobile's 35W envelope.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 10, 2007, 11:40 AM
 
The first X7800s they sold actually dissipated between 43 and 44 W TDP.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:50 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,