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 > 13" Intel iBook rumours redux

13" Intel iBook rumours redux
Thread Tools
Eug Wanker
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dangling something in the water… of the Arabian Sea
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 29, 2006, 10:46 AM
 
AppleInsider is rehashing the 13" widescreen iBook rumours: Apple's Front Row media experience coming to iBook line

They're still talking about:

Core Solo Yonah 1.67 GHz
13" widescreen
iSight
Firewire 400 & USB 2.0
SuperDrive
Front Row with Apple Remote

While I desperately want a 13" widescreen MacBook Pro with Core Duo to be released, I'm still not convinced. Thus, if the above machine is related it could very well be a MacBook Pro, not a MacBook/iBook.

We shall see, in a few months.
     
Voch
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 29, 2006, 11:40 AM
 
Same here. I'd spring the extra $500-$600 for a Core Duo over a Core Solo for the stuff I'd be doing on my new Mac portable, assuming this MacBook will be $999 and a theoretical 12"-13" MacBook Pro is $1499-$1599.

However, this iBook replacement sounds like a good deal too.

Voch
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 29, 2006, 06:06 PM
 
The problem with using Core Solo is the pricing... by dropping a core you only save $32 ($274 for single core 1.67 + chipset, $306 for dual core 1.67 + chipset), but you take a huge performance hit.
Perhaps they can bump the 15" to 2.0 (or even 2.16) Ghz, then the 13" can come in with Core Duo at 1.67Ghz.
     
jwoods
Forum Regular
Join Date: Dec 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 29, 2006, 09:15 PM
 
I'm just guessing here, but I think they'd go with the dual core, but use the same or similar plastic case and maybe knock off a few of the "pro" items off the ibook.

Smaller screen, plastic case, no magsafe connector (which I actually think is a great idea), smaller HDD, etc.

Who thinks the new ibooks are coming in April?
     
galarneau
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Canastota, New York
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 29, 2006, 09:57 PM
 
I agree... for only $32 more for a Core Duo, Apple better not cripple the next iBook.

But you know they will.
     
Eug Wanker  (op)
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dangling something in the water… of the Arabian Sea
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 29, 2006, 10:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by galarneau
I agree... for only $32 more for a Core Duo, Apple better not cripple the next iBook.

But you know they will.
I guarantee you that an iBook replacement will not have a dual-core chip.

In fact the point I was making with the original post was that I suspect Apple might not even use Core Solo in the next iBook/MacBook. Why? Because of cost. I was thinking along the lines of Apple possibly using Celeron M Yonah.

Celeron M Yonah competes with Pentium M Dothan in terms of performance, and it's way faster than the G4, so it's still be a nice performance boost, yet still would maintain reasonably high margins on the iBook/MacBook for Apple.
     
bourgeoisie
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: glendale, az
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 30, 2006, 12:40 AM
 
they'd be stupid not to include magsafe into any future portables, especially consumer portables since they're more likely to be used in bed, on the floor, kitched table, coffee table, etc etc.
green links don't belong to me!
     
andreas_g4
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: adequate, thanks.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 30, 2006, 03:29 PM
 
Originally Posted by jwoods
I'm just guessing here, but I think they'd go with the dual core, but use the same or similar plastic case and maybe knock off a few of the "pro" items off the ibook.

Smaller screen, plastic case, no magsafe connector (which I actually think is a great idea), smaller HDD, etc.
Bookmark this thread, nail me on it: There is no way the new iBooks won't have MagSafe, and they will have a new enclosure.
     
Eug Wanker  (op)
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dangling something in the water… of the Arabian Sea
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 30, 2006, 03:58 PM
 
I also agree MagSafe will be on the new iBooks/MacBooks. However, while I think it's a nice feature, I don't consider it a must-have like Firewire 400.

I'd like to see an iSight in all Mac laptops and consumer Mac desktops though. I'd be quite happy with a single-core iBook/MacBook spec'd out with Firewire 400, iSight, and Celeron M Yonah. However, if there is a 13" dual-core MacBook Pro with SuperDrive and backlit keyboard, I'll gladly pay a premium for it. I'm just not counting on it. Yonah Core Solo still seems like a possibility for a so-called "pro" small machine.

Mind you, I'm happy enough with my 1.33 GHz G4 iBook as it is. Thus, I'm not in any hurry to upgrade, especially considering the Intel compatibility issues.
     
quiklee
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 30, 2006, 04:26 PM
 
I would like an ibook - does anyone know when it'll come out?
I am part of Lakers Nation and love to buy Used Golf Clubs
     
harrisjamieh
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 30, 2006, 04:47 PM
 
I would HATE to have an apple product associated with the word Celeron. YUK! The word celeron just conjures up utter crappy processors which no matter how fast they are clocked at, the still only have a 256K cache, and hence just die on their arses when trying to do anything!
iMac Core Duo 1.83 Ghz | 1.25GB RAM | 160HD, MacBook Core Duo 1.83 Ghz | 13.3" | 60HD | 1.0GB RAM
     
slugslugslug
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Durham, NC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 30, 2006, 05:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by quiklee
I would like an ibook - does anyone know when it'll come out?
Yes.
     
Eug Wanker  (op)
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dangling something in the water… of the Arabian Sea
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 30, 2006, 05:09 PM
 
Originally Posted by harrisjamieh
I would HATE to have an apple product associated with the word Celeron. YUK! The word celeron just conjures up utter crappy processors which no matter how fast they are clocked at, the still only have a 256K cache, and hence just die on their arses when trying to do anything!
Perhaps you should read up on Yonah Celeron. A Yonah Celeron blows the G4 out of the water in terms of raw performance. It has 1 MB L2 cache by the way, the same amount of L2 as most Pentium M Dothan chips.
     
Timetheus
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Frogstar World B
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 30, 2006, 06:25 PM
 
It'll definityl have magsafe - they've used the same (As far as I know) non-magsafe power adapter for both the iBook and Powerbook lines. using the same adapter cuts cost, not to mention magsafe is great idea.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the Core Duo and "Yonah Celeron" the same chip? I thought Core Duo is the market name of the chip code-named Yonah before release.

Hope they put at least 64 megs of VRam - 32 is just ridiculous anymore (the eMacs had 32 a year ago). DDR2 would be nice to, it's cheaper at the moment anyway - plus additional volume discounts.
     
slugslugslug
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Durham, NC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 30, 2006, 08:00 PM
 
Yeah, Eug, since you seem to be really up on Intel's product lines, you should post a "recovering PowerPC zealot's guide to Intel processor families" to your blog. Or point us to what you've been reading. I hadn't realized there was a Celeron M Yonah, and I'd like to know if the Pentium M Dothan is a current or discontinued model.

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker
Mind you, I'm happy enough with my 1.33 GHz G4 iBook as it is. Thus, I'm not in any hurry to upgrade, especially considering the Intel compatibility issues.
Have you found it to be much of an improvement over your SuperDrive Ti? My Ti's starting to get old and broken-down, but none of the G4 laptops have seemed compelling enough as a replacement. Being in school again, though, I'm dying to get a light Intel-powered MacBook/iBook to complement my iMac.

Here's hoping they can cram a Blu-Ray drive into one before summer's end.

Oh, and +1111!1 on the MagSafe. My TiBook's hinge would be completely intact if MagSafe'd been around 3+ years ago..
     
Eug Wanker  (op)
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dangling something in the water… of the Arabian Sea
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 30, 2006, 08:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by Timetheus
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the Core Duo and "Yonah Celeron" the same chip? I thought Core Duo is the market name of the chip code-named Yonah before release.
Core Duo - Yonah dual-core, with 2 MB L2, already out
Core Solo - Yonah single-core, with 2 MB L2, already out
Celeron M - Yonah single-core, with 1 MB L2, coming out in a few months. (Current Celeron M chips are not based off Yonah.)

Originally Posted by slugslugslug
Yeah, Eug, since you seem to be really up on Intel's product lines, you should post a "recovering PowerPC zealot's guide to Intel processor families" to your blog. Or point us to what you've been reading.
Heh. It's all over the net, but this is one table that kinda summarizes most of the relevant stuff:



I hadn't realized there was a Celeron M Yonah, and I'd like to know if the Pentium M Dothan is a current or discontinued model.
Pentium M Dothan is current. It will eventually be discontinued of course however.

Have you found it to be much of an improvement over your SuperDrive Ti? My Ti's starting to get old and broken-down, but none of the G4 laptops have seemed compelling enough as a replacement. Being in school again, though, I'm dying to get a light Intel-powered MacBook/iBook to complement my iMac.
Speed-wise it's not a huge improvement over the TiBook. I just got it because it was cheap (since it came with a free iPod mini), because it got a Radeon 9550, and because I knew I could get a good price on the TiBook (which I found to be too bulky anyways).

Here's hoping they can cram a Blu-Ray drive into one before summer's end.
I'll be happy if it happens by late 2006 or MWSF 2007, and in a 13" 'Book. I doubt it will be available in an iBook replacement though.
     
slugslugslug
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Durham, NC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 30, 2006, 08:36 PM
 
Well, I just want small, whether its a "Pro" or an iBook replacement. If something has Blu-Ray in it this summer, I want it. If not, I'll just kick myself a lot when it shows up one iteration after I buy.

I wonder how hard it'll be to get into the case and swap an optical drive (I'm not optimistic)..
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 30, 2006, 10:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eug Wanker
Perhaps you should read up on Yonah Celeron. A Yonah Celeron blows the G4 out of the water in terms of raw performance. It has 1 MB L2 cache by the way, the same amount of L2 as most Pentium M Dothan chips.
All Dothan Pentium M have 2MB L2, not 1MB. Most have 533FSB, some have 400FSB.
     
Eug Wanker  (op)
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dangling something in the water… of the Arabian Sea
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 30, 2006, 11:02 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell
All Dothan Pentium M have 2MB L2, not 1MB. Most have 533FSB, some have 400FSB.
Correct. My bad. I should have said Pentium M Banias.
     
slugslugslug
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Durham, NC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 30, 2006, 11:34 PM
 
Gah.. Too many names.. Brain.. melting...

Seriously, I know I could go poking around the internets myself to learn this stuff, but you 2 have clearly done the initial scouting. So help a brother out and give up a few links to pertinent info about Intel procs, so I can come back here and blather about which'uns I hope to see in my next Mac.

Otherwise, I'm gonna have to keep trying to write this damned philosophy paper...
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 31, 2006, 01:03 AM
 
Originally Posted by slugslugslug
Gah.. Too many names.. Brain.. melting...

Seriously, I know I could go poking around the internets myself to learn this stuff, but you 2 have clearly done the initial scouting. So help a brother out and give up a few links to pertinent info about Intel procs, so I can come back here and blather about which'uns I hope to see in my next Mac.

Otherwise, I'm gonna have to keep trying to write this damned philosophy paper...
Wikipedia entry for INGM
     
slugslugslug
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Durham, NC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2006, 02:53 AM
 
Originally Posted by mduell
Thanks. By the way, is it pronounced like "dwell," "duel," or none of the above?
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2006, 06:44 AM
 
Celerons?

OK, Apple has already put so much effort into marketing Core to people I can't imagine them touching Celeron with a ten foot pole. Of course there will be a Celeron Yonah, so technically speaking there is a Core Celeron which can't be compared to the old Celerons, but for 95% of the buyers that's not an issue. For the vast majority Celeron stands for two things: a) cheap and b) peecee. No way Apple will try to market that to the Mac crowd which is still digesting the news that intel != double-plus-uncool.

In short: No Celeron. It's not here yet anyway, the T1300 is. If Apple wanted to wait, they could as well wait for the L1300. Apple certainly doesn't want to wait for Intel once they're ready to roll out a new MB. I'm pretty convinced it's also not necessary. Of course the savings going from a T2300 to a T1300 are not huge (32 bucks right now), but they are enough. Apple will be paying slightly more for a T1300 ($209) than for a 7447 (this is off of my memory, I couldn't find the exact prices quickly), but OTOH they will be saving a lot of money by using a unified MB for the iBook/12"PB/Mac mini that relies on cheaper and already available components - just the way the MBP and iMac are using a 'standard' Intel chipset. I'm convinced the new MacBook will cost Apple less to manufacture than the previous iBook. They will certainly be able to make up for the slight cost increase of the CPU. There's no need for a Celeron.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2006, 07:03 AM
 
Another point some here are trying to make is that there needs to be additional ways to distinguish a low-end MBP from the Mac Book marketing-wise. IMHO that's nonsense. Apple went through this whole mess before with the 12" iBook and 12" PB. I see no reason why they shouldn't be done with the issue for good. Forget the small MBP and think 13" MB only.

Apple can keep the price low enough to replace the iBook (Core solo, small HDD, Combo Drive, one SO-DIMM slot, no Express slot, no Modem, no Gigabit, no FW800 of course, 64MB VRAM with a cheap GPU), but offer CTO options giving users that want more power but still in a small package a decent option (larger HDDs, SuperDrive, Gigabit, VRAM, GPU, DVI output). That requires them to make two separate MBs, just like the 12" iBook and 12" PowerBook. But it has the great advantage that they don't need a third MB to replace the 14" iBook and they can even recycle the new MB design for the Mac mini.

This will keep cost low and make it a lot easier to market the device to buyers. Schools and people on a budget get the low-end model, MBP users that want a small package get the higher end model. The price range between $999 and $1499 can be covered; just like the 12" iBook and 12" PowerBook previously.

Many people on this board don't want to see that happening because they want MBP features in a tiny enclosure. Al looks more professional and such. Right. From all Apple has showed to us since the old days of the PB2400 (pre-Steve era) this is not going to happen. People should get used to the idea of carrying white if it has to be small. Like it or not - Al is for the big guys.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2006, 07:12 AM
 
After all that blurb, I forgot to post some specs.

So here's my guess
• Mac Book - 13.3" widescreen, T1300, 60-100GB, Combo/SD, 64MB/128MB VRAM, DVI optional
• Mac Book Pro - 15.2", T2300 & T2400 (the ones we just got)
• Mac Book Pro - 17", T2400, 100GB/120GB, SD, 256MB VRAM, Mob X1600

Nothing else on the portable side.
     
f1000
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2006, 07:37 AM
 
Originally Posted by Simon
People should get used to the idea of carrying white if it has to be small. Like it or not - Al is for the big guys.
Some of us are willing to pay a premium for a professional-looking 13" MacBook Pro. As long as Apple can make a buck, I hope they offer a 13" with an aluminum enclosure.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2006, 08:55 AM
 
Originally Posted by f1000
Some of us are willing to pay a premium for a professional-looking 13" MacBook Pro.
I'm certain there are many who would. But many on this board does not mean many among Apple's customers. The abysmal sales of the 12" PB compared to the 12" iBook in the past quarters have proven that.

The problem Apple has is that they seem to not be able to put the same hardware into the 12" PB enclosure that they put into the 15"/17". In some cases it may have been for marketing reasons (the clock always caught up one generation later), in others it certainly had to do with power consumption and heat load (GPU).

Assuming this problem persists, Apple will have the choice of offering two smaller models (a MB and a MBP) or offering just one MB model. In the past they shot themselves in the foot because people couldn't figure out why they should pay $500 for basically not much more than an Al case and a DVI output. Apple wouldn't have faced that issue if they had dropped the 12" PB altogether.

That's why I believe there will be no 13" MBP to compete with a 13" MB. Unless a miracle happens and Apple finds a way to put a T2300 and a Mob X1600 in the 13" MBP. That would give them enough differentiation to a T1300 MB. The problem with that is, it's not likely to happen. I have yet to hear somebody claim it's technically possible.

That said, I'd buy a T2300 13" MBP at once; I'd buy my g/f and my cat one too. I'd take it over the 15" model any day. But, what we want and what Apple can do have always been two separate issues.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2006, 09:02 AM
 
Come to think of it, maybe the 12" PB always was stigmatized by basically being an Al iBook. It was developed by iBook people and it shared many technical aspects with the iBook.

This time around Apple had the chance of redesigning it from scratch. That might help those in favor of a 13" MBP.
     
Eug Wanker  (op)
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dangling something in the water… of the Arabian Sea
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2006, 12:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by Simon
Celerons?

OK, Apple has already put so much effort into marketing Core to people I can't imagine them touching Celeron with a ten foot pole. Of course there will be a Celeron Yonah, so technically speaking there is a Core Celeron which can't be compared to the old Celerons, but for 95% of the buyers that's not an issue. For the vast majority Celeron stands for two things: a) cheap and b) peecee. No way Apple will try to market that to the Mac crowd which is still digesting the news that intel != double-plus-uncool.

In short: No Celeron. It's not here yet anyway, the T1300 is.
I personally would love to see Core Solo in the MacBook/iBook. I'm just not counting my eggs before they're hatched given the iBook's price point and Core Solo's vs. Celeron Yonah's price difference. Also, don't forget that if anyone can market a product, Apple can. How long have been stuck with the G4? You could very well be right however. Dell's pricing suggests Core Solo may be MacBookable in terms of cost. Their T1300 machines will start at $830, which means a $999 MacBook T1300 is reasonable.

Originally Posted by Simon
The abysmal sales of the 12" PB compared to the 12" iBook in the past quarters have proven that.
Where did you get the 12" sales numbers? Apple doesn't publish them. I do agree that you're probably right, but that's because Apple has crippled the 12" PowerBook far too much. I mean really, the 12" PowerBook can't even run Aperture, yet the iBook can. That's just stupid. If Apple released a better spec'd 12-13" machine worthy of the Power/Pro name, many would buy it over the iBook/MacBook.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2006, 02:06 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eug Wanker
Where did you get the 12" sales numbers? Apple doesn't publish them.
Apple never published numbers showing how one specific model of a product line compared to another. Heck, I think they recently even stopped publishing iBooks vs. PowerBooks.

A while back Piper Jaffray or a similar company (now where did I put that link...?) did a survey with authorized resellers and concluded that iBooks were outselling 12" PoweBooks by about 5:1. The 15" PowerBook OTOH was doing very well compared to the 12" PowerBook even though it's a lot more expensive.

I do agree that you're probably right, but that's because Apple has crippled the 12" PowerBook far too much. I mean really, the 12" PowerBook can't even run Aperture, yet the iBook can. That's just stupid. If Apple released a better spec'd 12-13" machine worthy of the Power/Pro name, many would buy it over the iBook/MacBook.
Certainly. I think Apple's problem is that they can't put the same guts into the 12" as the 15"; it's not just pure marketing (remember, Steve loves small things, it's not that he is just being a biased idiot), but also technical limits that force them to use lower end components on the 12". That forces them to lower the price on the 12" (because otherwise it wouldn't sell) which in turn makes them want to dumb it down additionally because they'd like to see people upgrade to the 15" which drives more revenue. That game OTOH brings the 12" PB price too close to the iBook. You see, Apple is getting caught in its own mess.

IMHO there are two ways to end this vicious circle. One is to just drop the 12" altogether. That might bug some people on this board, but it would solve the problem. The other is to make a miracle come true and put exactly the same guts in the 13" model as they have in the 15" MBP. Then they can easily justify the additional cost over a T1300 MB. But as I already mentioned, nobody seems to thinks it's possible to put a T2300 with a Mob X1600 in a 13" book.

I hope we'll know more in two months from now.
     
Eug Wanker  (op)
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dangling something in the water… of the Arabian Sea
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2006, 02:18 PM
 
Certainly. I think Apple's problem is that they can't put the same guts into the 12" as the 15"; it's not just pure marketing (remember, Steve loves small things, it's not that he is just being a biased idiot), but also technical limits that force them to use lower end components on the 12". That forces them to lower the price on the 12" (because otherwise it wouldn't sell) which in turn makes them want to dumb it down additionally because they'd like to see people upgrade to the 15" which drives more revenue. That game OTOH brings the 12" PB price too close to the iBook. You see, Apple is getting caught in its own mess.

IMHO there are two ways to end this vicious circle. One is to just drop the 12" altogether. That might bug some people on this board, but it would solve the problem. The other is to make a miracle come true and put exactly the same guts in the 13" model as they have in the 15" MBP. Then they can easily justify the additional cost over a T1300 MB. But as I already mentioned, nobody seems to thinks it's possible to put a T2300 with a Mob X1600 in a 13" book.
They don't need to put the 15" guts into the 12" (or 13"). They just need to make it a more reasonable machine. The current PowerBook 12" is actually worse spec'd in some ways than the iBook, for no good reason.

However, if Apple were to just continue crippling the 13", I'd also just want them to kill it altogether.

By the way, power-wise, they could put a core duo in a 13" pretty easily, but they'd have to wait for a low power version of the chip, which unfortunately costs a lot of money.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2006, 02:21 PM
 
Of course they could put the L2300 into a 13" MBP instead of a T2300 or a T1300.

Problem is, it drives the price up even further. It's currently going for $284

It would be rather ironic to have the cheapest MBP sport the most expensive CPU.
     
Eug Wanker  (op)
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dangling something in the water… of the Arabian Sea
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2006, 02:26 PM
 
Although you're probably already aware of this, I will just reiterate that those prices aren't what Apple pays.

Those are standard prices in batches of 1000, without any included volume discounts or whatever.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2006, 02:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by slugslugslug
Thanks. By the way, is it pronounced like "dwell," "duel," or none of the above?
Dual/duel, unless you're a telemarketer.

Originally Posted by Simon
After all that blurb, I forgot to post some specs.

So here's my guess
• Mac Book - 13.3" widescreen, T1300, 60-100GB, Combo/SD, 64MB/128MB VRAM, DVI optional
• Mac Book Pro - 15.2", T2300 & T2400 (the ones we just got)
• Mac Book Pro - 17", T2400, 100GB/120GB, SD, 256MB VRAM, Mob X1600

Nothing else on the portable side.
I don't think Apple can/should/will cover their biggest portable segment with just one model (the 13").

Originally Posted by Simon
I'm certain there are many who would. But many on this board does not mean many among Apple's customers. The abysmal sales of the 12" PB compared to the 12" iBook in the past quarters have proven that.
The 12" PowerBook sales may be abysmal compared to the 12" iBook sales, but the 12" is still the best selling PowerBook.
For the first two quarters of last year (the last time Apple broke down the figures), the average Apple laptop selling price was $1300 and the average PowerBook price was $2000: the iBooks are grabbing the bulk of the portable units and the 12" is the most popular of the PowerBooks.

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker
Where did you get the 12" sales numbers? Apple doesn't publish them. I do agree that you're probably right, but that's because Apple has crippled the 12" PowerBook far too much. I mean really, the 12" PowerBook can't even run Aperture, yet the iBook can. That's just stupid. If Apple released a better spec'd 12-13" machine worthy of the Power/Pro name, many would buy it over the iBook/MacBook.
You can make educated guesses from the average selling price (as I did above).

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker
Although you're probably already aware of this, I will just reiterate that those prices aren't what Apple pays.

Those are standard prices in batches of 1000, without any included volume discounts or whatever.
Agreed, but they're indicitive in relative terms of what Apple is paying. Based on the iSuppli breakdown, it looks like Apple is getting about a 13% discount from the 1Ku prices.
     
f1000
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2006, 03:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by Simon
IMHO there are two ways to end this vicious circle. One is to just drop the 12" altogether. That might bug some people on this board, but it would solve the problem. The other is to make a miracle come true and put exactly the same guts in the 13" model as they have in the 15" MBP. Then they can easily justify the additional cost over a T1300 MB. But as I already mentioned, nobody seems to thinks it's possible to put a T2300 with a Mob X1600 in a 13" book.
Well, I'd like to see Apple resurrect aspects of the old PowerBook Duos by eliminating the internal optical from the 12" PB. The iBook could keep its optical and AiO form factor, but the MacBook Pro would be made both thinner and lighter. I wouldn't mind seeing a 13" MBP ultraslim that took its design cues from the iPod nano. Instead of the polished chrome, though, I'd suggest a chrome dot finish (sorry, this is the closest representation I could find):

     
harrisjamieh
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2006, 05:40 PM
 
I would hate to see any laptop without an internal optical drive, even if it makes it 1/2 the size. Though I do not always use the optical drive in my iBook, I would be lost on the odd occasion that I am away from home and need to install software/burn a disc/ use a disc in anyway. I hate laptops that are made smaller by sacrificing vital elements that make up a decent computer - aka optical drive.
iMac Core Duo 1.83 Ghz | 1.25GB RAM | 160HD, MacBook Core Duo 1.83 Ghz | 13.3" | 60HD | 1.0GB RAM
     
f1000
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2006, 05:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by harrisjamieh
Though I do not always use the optical drive in my iBook, I would be lost on the odd occasion that I am away from home and need to install software/burn a disc/ use a disc in anyway.
1. iBooks would remain AiO (All-in-One).
2. MacBook Pro owners could purchase an optional external optical (or even a dock).
3. MacBook Pro owners could use Ethernet/Wi-Fi/Bluetooth/or an iPod shuffle to transfer data.
     
slugslugslug
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Durham, NC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2006, 06:08 PM
 
I would love to see a Mac laptop without an optical drive. It'd certainly be able to boot from a FireWire optical drive, and Apple could even make a nice matching one. Honestly, an internal optical drive is far from vital, as long as you have some kind of option for a backup boot volume.

Of course, I think the dock idea is the most exciting. Even though it would mean another proprietary connector, I think this would be so cool: a dock containing an optical drive and passthrough for FW/USB/DVI. It could ordinarily just sit at home connected to monitor and peripherals, but it'd be small and snug-fitting enough to take with you for when you need an optical drive on the road. Plus it'd connect via (at least) FW to other computers that lack the Apple Portable Docking Connector Thingy™.

I'd buy it.
     
Drakino
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2006, 06:26 PM
 
Last time I heard rankings on the powerbooks from a local Apple shop, they were moving the 15 inch the most, then the 12, then the 17. No idea how many, but the 12 was doing better then the 17. Didn't hear how these numbers ranked against the iBooks though, and this was based on last year, not anything post MacBook announcement.
<This space under renovation>
     
Eug Wanker  (op)
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dangling something in the water… of the Arabian Sea
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2006, 07:32 PM
 
Count me in also as one who hates laptops which don't have optical drives.

I think Apple will continue including optical drives on all its laptops.
     
King Bob On The Cob
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Illinois
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2006, 09:42 PM
 
I see the iBook not shifting away from the 12" and 14" specs, I much rather see the MBP going 13" so it will be widescreen across the line (and also differentiate it from the iBook)
I also see the iBook name sticking (iMac stuck, so why not?) I think MacBook Pro name is as it is just because Apple's still trying to sell PowerBooks and wants them to keep selling for the time being. I could see a name shift back to PowerBook in the future. The 12" iBook would probably be single core (Apple's known for crippling it's low end line to make sure the top of the line seems that much more top of the line [see current iBooks compared to PowerBooks in processor speed]). I don't know. We'll wait and see.
     
slugslugslug
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Durham, NC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2006, 10:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eug Wanker
Count me in also as one who hates laptops which don't have optical drives.
Okay, but you hate it like you hate those pants that fit you wrong, no? (as in, you don't ever want to use it).. I mean, you don't hate it like you hate Windows, do you (i.e. think it's a travesty that anyone might ever be subjected to it)?

Because the latter would be irrational. If I get a laptop, I'll want to take it to school frequently, which means I'll be carrying it all over on my back and rarely using optical media. The weight-savings advantage would totally trump the tiny inconvenience of no drive.
I think Apple will continue including optical drives on all its laptops.
I do too, I just wish they add a MacBook mini without one.

Originally Posted by King Bob On The Cob
I also see the iBook name sticking (iMac stuck, so why not?) I think MacBook Pro name is as it is just because Apple's still trying to sell PowerBooks and wants them to keep selling for the time being. I could see a name shift back to PowerBook in the future.
Um, it would seem "iMac" stuck because it contains "Mac", which fits in with what Steve said about their computer branding. "iBook" does not contain "Mac", so it seems pretty likely to go. And "PowerBook" coming back would be just weird (though I do prefer it to "MacBook Pro" by a factor of about a zillion).

I mean, Apple/Steve have certainly done their share of backpedaling, but I think you're wrong.
     
Gamoe
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 2, 2006, 01:57 AM
 
I would love to see an optical-driveless Mac subnotebook. This doesn't mean of course, that that I think optical drives should vanish all-together from the iBook/MacBook line, but it's another option I would love and would probably purchase, if the price were right.

I would also love to see the Duo concept come back. I can't make a portable my main machine because of three main reasons:

1.) CPU Power (I need relatively little on the go... word processing, etc, but I do need to be able to encode movies and run Photoshop on my desktop).

2.) Storage capacity (I need more than what is currently available on notebooks, and will need more than that when that is available in notebooks).

3.) Display (I prefer working on a 1680x1050 20" display than a 1024x768 12" display when I'm working on Movies and so forth, though the latter is fine for what I do on my iBook).

A dock can maintain an additional processor, a separate 3.5" high-capacity internal hard drive, and a DVI and VGA connection for a larger screen. It could also potentially include a separate, upgradable graphics card, but such things are but dreams...
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 2, 2006, 02:05 AM
 
I don't think Apple will introduce a sub-notebook sans the optical in the near future. I would however be interested to buy one. I rarely need the optical and when I do, I'm working at my desk at the lab or at home. On the road I want something light and thin.

That said, Apple would be already going a great step if they finally included some kind of docking interface. It's a standard feature on any pro PC notebook and it gets used widely by my linux notebook using colleagues. The way it is right now, it's impossible to make a decent dock for the 15" and 17" Books and the only one that does exist sucks so bad, it shouldn't be around. I'd like to see Apple put a dock connector behind a flap at the bottom of the case. Only when the MBP slides onto the dock, the flap would reveal the connector. Nice and clean. Best of all, it already works as countless PC notebooks prove (also on some that aren't ten pounds and 2" thick).
     
im_noahselby
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 2, 2006, 01:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by Gabriel Morales
I would love to see an optical-driveless Mac subnotebook. This doesn't mean of course, that that I think optical drives should vanish all-together from the iBook/MacBook line, but it's another option I would love and would probably purchase, if the price were right.

I would also love to see the Duo concept come back. I can't make a portable my main machine because of three main reasons....(snip)
I can only see an Apple portable sans optical drive benfiting people like you, who would buy it to compliment their main system. For users who have more than one mac, they wouldn't have as much of a need for an optical drive in their laptop, but for everyone else, especially those who do use it as their main system, it is probbably the most used and most important ability of a laptop. I think more than anything having an optical drive built-in is convient for 99% of the people who buy laptops. Apple even makes them sleek by making them slot loaders, so we don't have to fumble with a flimsy tray.

Noah
Macbook 2.0 Ghz - Black
iPhone 4GB - Fido
     
slugslugslug
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Durham, NC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 3, 2006, 12:22 PM
 
Think Secret just weighed in, claiming an announcement is imminent in March, with availability ramping up in April. Core Solo.

I'm, of course, aflutter with anticipation. The downside of the prediction for me is that a second iteration by the end of August is unlikely. Not that I have any irrational fear of "Rev A," thank you very much, it's just that holding out longer lets me get more power at the same price, but I want a new laptop for the next school year.

On the other hand, if they do have separate MacBook and MacBook Pro lines in the 13" size, I might have one more option before summer's out. Here's hopin'.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 3, 2006, 07:45 PM
 
With the $32 difference between Core Duo and Core Solo and other OEMs (like Dell) putting Core Duo in their sub-$999 laptops, it would be a shame if Apple didn't put Core Duo in their $999 'book.
     
im_noahselby
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 4, 2006, 02:34 AM
 
Originally Posted by slugslugslug
Think Secret just weighed in, claiming an announcement is imminent in March, with availability ramping up in April. Core Solo.
See my recent thread here. Thinksecret thought they'd nailed it when they predicted 13" Intel iBooks in January. They cited "realiable sourses" and before long the story rippled acorss the internet, creating a buzz that was felt from all over the mac community. They were so wrong. Their credibility certainly dropped a notch in my book. Needless to say, I wouldn't get too excited about rumors published by Thinksecret.

Their regular coverage is fine. If only they would stick to what they're good at.

Even without this new report published by ThinkSecret, I think we all could probbably come to the conclusion that before April we will have new iBooks.

Noah
Macbook 2.0 Ghz - Black
iPhone 4GB - Fido
     
im_noahselby
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 4, 2006, 02:38 AM
 
Originally Posted by mduell
With the $32 difference between Core Duo and Core Solo and other OEMs (like Dell) putting Core Duo in their sub-$999 laptops, it would be a shame if Apple didn't put Core Duo in their $999 'book.
Agreed!

I think Apple would use the Core Solo in their MacBook line to distinguish it from their MacBook Pro lineup of computers. Even after weighing in on the cost, from a marketing stand point, it probbably makes much more sense for them to use the Solo.

I hope I'm wrong.

Noah
Macbook 2.0 Ghz - Black
iPhone 4GB - Fido
     
slugslugslug
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Durham, NC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 4, 2006, 12:29 PM
 
Originally Posted by im_noahselby
See my recent thread here.... Needless to say, I wouldn't get too excited about rumors published by Thinksecret.
I was just passing it along as a bit of information coming from a corner of the Not-always-completely-fabricated Mac Rumor Web (if I'd just said "Mac Rumor Web," it might have implied that I pay attention to reports from MOSR or O'Grady), not preaching it as gospel. Just like this thread was started by Eug's neutrally noting what AI reported. I do think, though, that when some datum appears on both AI and TS, it deserves a little extra attention.

If only macrumors.com and As The Apple Turns still had their own independent sources (or in the case of AtAT, any spark of life), we might know the real deal.
     
 
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 08:23 AM.
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.,