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 > OK...Core Duo (Original MacBook 2006 2.0 Ghz - Vs. latest 13: MB Pro

OK...Core Duo (Original MacBook 2006 2.0 Ghz - Vs. latest 13: MB Pro
Thread Tools
masugu
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Bay Area
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2010, 02:11 AM
 
OK....add me to the list of disappointed folks who saw the Core 2 Duo remain in the 13: Model. That model is prefect in terms of size / portability etc.

My BlackBook still runs fine...although it is a tad poky on MS office Apps...

Opinions re: whether I should stay with the BlackBook / wait for Core i7, 5 or 3... to make it downstream - or get the new one???

Thanks.
masugu - "Straight Ahead"
BlacBook Core Duo / Original Intel-based MB - DIY Core i7 PC |
     
macaddict0001
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Edmonton, AB
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2010, 02:33 AM
 
I'm slightly surprised that it's pokey on Ms office stuff, haven't used it recently but I would think that the most demanding thing would be PPT and even then it shouldn't need much. Hopefully you've upgraded the ram, from 512MB-2GB, that will make a huge difference. The only things that really let it down are the 2GB ram cap(but not much, 2GB is still more than enough ram for most people) and the Integrated graphics that don't support hardware T&L. I would keep it and use it for a while yet.
     
masugu  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Bay Area
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2010, 02:53 AM
 
Thanks for your thoughts...

Office apps are a tad slow to launch. Yes. I do have the Max 2 gigs of ram installed.

Yes...I am inclined to keep it a bit longer. I mainly use iPhoto / surf the web and use word / excel.I do use photoshop CS3 and that too works ok.

No desire for aperture or game playing, so yeah.

Wow. One of the first times in my Mac Life I see my self holding off - and not biting my tongue!
masugu - "Straight Ahead"
BlacBook Core Duo / Original Intel-based MB - DIY Core i7 PC |
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2010, 03:25 AM
 
Bottom line: can you wait another 6-10 months?

The next 13" MBP will likely come with i5 and maybe even USB3. But the new 13" MBP would indeed solve your issues: it's much faster and you can run it with more RAM.

Alternative option: get a fast SSD now and install it into your MB. Disk performance is a large part of overall perceived performance. The SSD could hold you over until the next 13" is released. Then get a new 13" MBP and swap the SSD over to it.
     
masugu  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Bay Area
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2010, 03:47 AM
 
Thanks Simon...

I think I can wait 6 mos - barring any unfortunate incidents. Knock Wood!

The C2D version seems a tad short-sighted to me...I really can do all that I want...but would welcome a sleek aluminum model. Will have to watch those watch scratches on the wrist rests though!!
masugu - "Straight Ahead"
BlacBook Core Duo / Original Intel-based MB - DIY Core i7 PC |
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2010, 04:17 AM
 
I would also suggest you wait a few more months if you can. Knowing Apple, you'll probably wait closer to 10 months than 6, though
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
QuadG5Man
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Oct 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2010, 05:52 PM
 
RE: slow office apps launching

You might want to try and clear out space on your hard drive too. If your hard drive of over 75% full it will slow down app launch times...
2002 Mac Mini i5 8GB 256GB SSD
2013 Macbook Air 4GB/128GB
iPad Mini A7 32GB
     
imitchellg5
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2010, 06:04 PM
 
Office isn't exactly a speed demon on anything, especially if you're using 2004 with Rosetta.

I'm not sure where people are pulling 10 months out of, since it's pretty much always a year or more for a truly major spec bump like i5 would be.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2010, 06:15 PM
 
Originally Posted by imitchellg5 View Post
Office isn't exactly a speed demon on anything, especially if you're using 2004 with Rosetta.

I'm not sure where people are pulling 10 months out of, since it's pretty much always a year or more for a truly major spec bump like i5 would be.
Eight to ten months, 208 days average.
Mac Buyer's Guide: Know When to Buy Your Mac, iPod or iPhone
     
masugu  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Bay Area
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2010, 09:43 PM
 
Thanks...Wow...if I wait until 2011, I will be on a 5 year old Mac notebook. THAT would be a first!!!
masugu - "Straight Ahead"
BlacBook Core Duo / Original Intel-based MB - DIY Core i7 PC |
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2010, 10:30 AM
 
The 15" MBP has been updated every eight months since its inception. The only exception being this latest update which took ten months.

The 13" MB was always updated every 6 months. Then the 13" MBP was updated after 10 months.
     
BobWoodshed
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2010, 01:04 PM
 
I also own a 2.0ghz black C2D Macbook and you actually haven't maxed out the RAM. I've been running 3GB for about two years now and it has made quite a bit of difference (yeah yeah you don't get matched pairs). I'm on the upgrade fence just like you, but I'm thinking of holding out a bit longer as well.
21.5" iMac 3.06 i3 4GB | White iPhone 3GS
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2010, 02:19 PM
 
Originally Posted by BobWoodshed View Post
I also own a 2.0ghz black C2D Macbook and you actually haven't maxed out the RAM. I've been running 3GB for about two years now and it has made quite a bit of difference (yeah yeah you don't get matched pairs). I'm on the upgrade fence just like you, but I'm thinking of holding out a bit longer as well.
The original MacBook (May 2006) had a Core Duo, not a Core 2 Duo, and a 2GB RAM ceiling.

The Core 2 Duos released in November 2006 eat 3 GB.
     
BobWoodshed
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2010, 03:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
The original MacBook (May 2006) had a Core Duo, not a Core 2 Duo, and a 2GB RAM ceiling.

The Core 2 Duos released in November 2006 eat 3 GB.
Whoops, that's my bad for getting releases mixed up.

In that case I would think just the abilities to run 64-bit applications and quadruple your RAM would be well worth it if you need the speed bump.
21.5" iMac 3.06 i3 4GB | White iPhone 3GS
     
ph0ust
Senior User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2010, 04:14 PM
 
this thread is sad. apple dropped the ball on this update. all the other mbps are great, but i don't want a laptop bigger than the 13". that is the only reasonable size that balances screen with portability (especially if you fly a lot). i have the same blackbook and it is a bit wonky, but i just don't want to update it to the new 13" mbp. i doubt they care or that it will hurt them, but it seems there are more than a few people who only want a 13" laptop and will not buy the new one.
     
SpaceMonkey
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2010, 04:15 PM
 
Ars has an interesting article on the 13" update:

Why the 13" MacBook Pro didn't get a Core i5 upgrade

"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 21, 2010, 03:39 AM
 
Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey View Post
Ars has an interesting article on the 13" update:

Why the 13" MacBook Pro didn't get a Core i5 upgrade
All the people complaining about this update should read the Ars article.

Bottom line: Had Apple gone Core i5 on the 13" MBP you would be stuck with Arrandale IGP which means worse graphics performance on various tasks compared to the much older 9400M. Going with the new 320M instead of Intel's crappy IGP was a no-brainer.
( Last edited by Simon; Apr 22, 2010 at 02:19 AM. Reason: typo)
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 21, 2010, 05:16 AM
 
Is Intel still dragging its feet on the necessary licensing to Nvidia so that it can develop for the Core i series? Or is Nvidia still working on the design?

Apple can't leave the MacBook stuck with the Core 2 indefinitely. Maybe this is why the AMD rumors are circulating.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 21, 2010, 05:51 AM
 
I don't think Intel is "dragging its feet" with licensing. The DON'T WANT to license plain and simple. They know Arrandale IGP sucks compared to Nvidia's integrated graphics. By not licensing they're cutting off a huge potential revenue stream for Nvidia and rerouting it to their own pockets.

I'm not at all surprised we're hearing these AMD rumors with Core iX locking out Nvidia graphics.
     
imitchellg5
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 21, 2010, 08:43 PM
 
Originally Posted by ph0ust View Post
this thread is sad. apple dropped the ball on this update. all the other mbps are great, but i don't want a laptop bigger than the 13". that is the only reasonable size that balances screen with portability (especially if you fly a lot). i have the same blackbook and it is a bit wonky, but i just don't want to update it to the new 13" mbp. i doubt they care or that it will hurt them, but it seems there are more than a few people who only want a 13" laptop and will not buy the new one.
Apple didn't drop the ball at all. Remember, the 13" MBP only recently had the Pro moniker attached to it, gained astronomical battery life, a SD card slot, Firewire, etc. Just because it's not as much of an impressive update as the 15" doesn't mean it's not a good update.
     
The Godfather
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Tampa, Florida
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 21, 2010, 09:14 PM
 
The next i5, Sandy Bridge, will have the graphics integrated in the CPU, moved from the northbridge.
Intel Sandy Bridge: Details of the next gen | bit-tech.net
Perhaps that will reduce wattage, as those terabytes don't need to travel a couple of inches.

I'd say, wait until Christmas. C2D will definitely be extinct by then, and Apple will offer something with i3, i5 or Athlon (if they really want to make you mad). At that point, buy whatever they have for sale in the refurb section.
     
   
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 02:57 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.,