[x user]

But cost isn't the issue, they need something to differentiate the MBP from the iBook/MB and I THINK that the core solo would be it. I'm not saying that I wouldn't personally pay an extra $32 for a core duo, I just think that Apple will use this as the reason for people to upgrade to the MBP. Same with the iMac G5 vs. Powermac G5 Duals and Quads... iMac is a horrifically better deal for most people because they don't need duals for anything. If you take a core solo in a laptop, it will do most everything that needs to be done as long as it is running natively. In rosetta, it will probably lose some major ground, but hopefull Intel-native programs aren't too far in the future.

On the other hand, I feel that whatever is introduced tomorrow, be it iBooks or Mac Mini's or Powermacs (MacDeskPros?) will give us a much better idea of what Apple's plan for the future is.

Apple branded PDA/iPod/whatever ... we'll see.

[im_noahselby]

I think a core-duo in a MacBook makes sense for several reasons:

- cost
- mac os will perform better in the long haul, especially as it is optimized to take advantage of the core duo chip
- marketing wise, it is a smart move. it wouldn't be confusing to the consumer. also, it shouldn't be the determining factor that differentiates the two line-ups.
- Intel iMac's went from G5 to core duo.
- Mac Mini's went from G4 to core duo. (added 03/01/06)

Interestingly enough, Apple recently bumped up the MacBook Pro's speed just days before they were scheduled to ship. This currently leaves the 1.6 Core Duo untouched. This was VERY sudden and VERY unexpected. Maybe we will see these chips in the new MacBooks, maybe we won't. All I'm trying to say is that it is certainly plausible.

Tomorrow should bring many exciting announcements. One announcement that I don't expect is the big one we are all waiting for.

Noah

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by im_noahselby

I think a core-duo in a MacBook makes sense for several reasons:

- cost
- mac os will perform better in the long haul, especially as it is optimized to take advantage of the core duo chip
- marketing wise, it is a smart move. it wouldn't be confusing to the consumer. also, it shouldn't be the determining factor that differentiates the two line-ups.
-Intel iMac's went from G5 to core duo.

I think a core-duo in a MacBook makes little sense (at least in the base model) for one main reason:

- cost

[im_noahselby]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

I think a core-duo in a MacBook makes little sense (at least in the base model) for one main reason:

- cost

I would be shocked if Apple put a core duo in a base model MacBook, as well. However, I'm not willing to discredit the possibility that they may put a core duo in a middle or high end MacBook. In fact, I think it is likely.

We will just have to wait and see...

Noah

[galarneau]

Please Jebus,

Don't let the MacBook have integrated graphics like the new Mini.

[gametime10]

If the Intel Mini gets a core duo, aren't chances looking good that the Macbook will get a duo also?

[x user]

God in heaven, if it has integrated graphics, I'll be buying a more expensive machine. I can put up with a lot of crap, but not integrated graphics, last machine I had that had that was a 8600... and even that had it's own VRAM.

[im_noahselby]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

I think a core-duo in a MacBook makes little sense (at least in the base model) for one main reason:

- cost

If Apple can put a core duo in the mac mini, cost is a poor main argument against a core duo in a MacBook.

Noah

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by im_noahselby

If Apple can put a core duo in the mac mini, cost is a poor main argument against a core duo in a MacBook.

Noah

Well:

1) Core Duo is not in the base model Mac mini.
2) The top end model of the Mac mini costs $799. The previous top end model cost $699.

So cost is most definitely an issue here. Apple just chose to pass the cost difference (and then some) on to us.

I still say the base model MacBook won't have a Core Duo. You may be right that a top end model might, but I just hope the MacBooks aren't more expensive and have integrated graphics.

[Voch]

Well I may pull the trigger on a theoretical 13.3"/14" widescreen MacBook Core Duo 1.67 with integrated graphics if it's inexpensive and has some nicities (SerialATA HD, DVI output, Gigabit ethernet and a remote, all of which the Intel mini has ).

I guess with all the furor that's brewing over the integrated graphics has made me realize that outside of MacMAME and Stella I don't play games of any kind on my Mac (well, with my TiBook I really can't play much newer than Quake 3). Both of those are more CPU intensive than graphics intensive, mostly because they're cross-platform ports (like a LOT of stuff I use...Firefox, Thunderbird, Eclipse, etc.).

But I *do* want the Core Duo as it'll help with my Java software development and to do two things at once (code while watching DiVX files on a separate monitor or TV). I'm sitting in my office right now hackin' code on my company-owned Dell desktop but would be using my TiBook if it had more oomph for Eclipse and such.

I also anticipate a MacBook Pro with similar specs and a real video chip for $200-$300 more than the integrated video MacBook along the pricing lines of the iBook vs. PowerBook 12" of the G4 models. But then there will be discernable feature gap between the iBook/MB and PowerBook/MBP lines for those who called the PB 12" an aluminum-clad iBook.

Voch

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

I think a core-duo in a MacBook makes little sense (at least in the base model) for one main reason:

- cost

I agree there is one reason, but it's not cost ($32 diff between Solo and Duo), it's stratification. Apple can force the people who want Core Duo to also buy a bigger HDD, more RAM, and a SuperDrive.

I expect the 13" MB will have GMA950 and the 13" MBP will have X1300.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by mduell

I agree there is one reason, but it's not cost ($32 diff between Solo and Duo), it's stratification. Apple can force the people who want Core Duo to also buy a bigger HDD, more RAM, and a SuperDrive.

I expect the 13" MB will have GMA950 and the 13" MBP will have X1300.

That would be disappointing if the iBook replacement line got a GMA 950. Anyways, I more or less agree with you. Apple is stratifying the lines, but part of the stratification is related to price of higher end parts. Apple gets to keep the iBook replacement line cheap, while at the same time, creating a big difference from the higher end MBP line in terms of performance (and price).

Mind you, this is the logic I used for saying the Mac mini would be entirely single-core. We know what happened there.

BTW, I'm glad you agree there will be a MBP, as so many people think there will be no such thing.

[Voch]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

BTW, I'm glad you agree there will be a MBP, as so many people think there will be no such thing.

I'm *hoping* there will be such an MBP, but am not counting on it.

Voch

[x user]

I do agree that there will be a MBP. The 12" powerbook is hugely popular despite how badly a crippled machine it is. (Still with the crappy Nvidia chipset ). I personally hope that Apple will have a decent GPU in the iBook so I can buy the cheaper machine, but I'm not counting on it. Given the price hikes we've seen throughout the intel switch I'd expect a $1099 iBook base and a $1699 MBP 13" base price when they do come out, to be reduced in 3 months when the processor prices drop more. I expect the distingushing differences to be. Processor (if the iBook gets the CoreDuo it would be at 1.67, and PB at 1.8, but I really expect the iBook to stick to CoreSolo), GPU which I hope is better than the x1300, maybe the X1600 on the MBP, but I'd expect the iBook to sludge around with the intel crapolla. And the I also expect the new iBook to only support Video mirroring on it's output... Who knows though...

[Voch]

I'm anticipating something, well, obvious along the Mac mini lines:

$999 MacBook Core Solo 1.5Ghz 13.3" with integrated graphics, combo drive, xxGB BD
$1299 MacBook Core Duo 1.67Ghz 13.3" with integrated graphics, DVD burner, (xx+20)GB HD

I think the "1.5Ghz" thing is because that's a magic number the iBook has never reached.

Hopefully these estimates won't go up $100 but they might, at least for the early adopters.

As for a MBP, maybe a $1599 MacBook Pro Core Duo 1.67Ghz 13.3" with some Nvidia chip or the ATI X1300. Then let the arguing about the extra $300 being "worth it" for a GPU and metal case like the iBook/PBG4 12" debates...

EDIT: such price gaps between integrated graphics and GPU-enabled notebooks are not unprecedented. Dell's Inspiron 9400 (the 17" Core Duo model) comes with GMA 950 integrated graphics standard but if you want a GPU it's a $299 option (256MB NVIDA® GeForce™ Go 7800).

Voch

[x user]

I still think that the CPU speed will be faster for the MBP as well. It appears to me that Apple is trying to DEFINE the different models, not make them hard to choose. IE the integrated graphics wouldn't be enough for some people to choose the MBP over the MB, but a 1.8ish ghz processor, better graphics and maybe a couple of other things thrown in would do the trick nicely IMHO

[im_noahselby]

Mark my words. You will not see anything faster than 1.66 Core Duo's in the upcoming MacBooks.

- I'm thinking Apple will follow the recently announced Mac Mini as a model, and use the 1.5 Core Solo and the 1.6 Core Duo.
- I don't think we'll be seeing integrated graphics. This would piss too many people off. However, I will admit that seeing integrated graphics in the new Mac Mini's really surprised me. Anything is possible, I suppose.

No one here has mentioned anything about integrated iSights? Front Row and remote? This is a huge part of Apple's digital hub strategy. I see either the entire MacBook lineup getting these cool features or none of the MacBook models getting them.

What are others thoughts?

Noah

[silentauthority]

mac mini has to get integrated graphics to differientiate from the iMac.

Do we have to see the same thing between Macbooks and Macbook Pro's

I don't want it to happen, but (cringe) it will.

[JoeDokes]

Why do all the discussions center on the 13 inch format? None of the other Intel machines introduced so far have changed format (the MBP is the exception, being slightly wider). Isn't it more likely the new ones will look exactly like the existing ones, with any real form change waitint for a Rev B or C round?
JD

[Voch]

Originally Posted by JoeDokes

Why do all the discussions center on the 13 inch format? None of the other Intel machines introduced so far have changed format (the MBP is the exception, being slightly wider). Isn't it more likely the new ones will look exactly like the existing ones, with any real form change waitint for a Rev B or C round?
JD

A lot of folks (myself included) just think that the iBook is due for a total revamp as its current 12" form factor came out May 1st 2001 and that the Intel transition would be a good time to do so.

There's also lots of other features on the MacBook Pro that can be used to replace widescreen-vs.-not as a diffrentiator like integrated graphics vs. a GPU, backlit keyboard, ExpressCard slots, iSight camera, and especially a larger variety of processors (Core Duo vs. Solo at varying speeds).

Also: the widescreen displays are becoming more and more mainstream as an available part to Apple. I'm sure they're inexpensive enough for Apple to start using in their budget portables.

And, probably most importantly, optimism. The general consensus is that the current iBook displays are, well, um, poor. I liked mine when I had the original white iBook G3/500 but have since been spoiled by my TiBook's display (and that's not as good as what's out NOW ).

Voch

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Voch

As for a MBP, maybe a $1599 MacBook Pro Core Duo 1.67Ghz 13.3" with some Nvidia chip or the ATI X1300. Then let the arguing about the extra $300 being "worth it" for a GPU and metal case like the iBook/PBG4 12" debates...

EDIT: such price gaps between integrated graphics and GPU-enabled notebooks are not unprecedented. Dell's Inspiron 9400 (the 17" Core Duo model) comes with GMA 950 integrated graphics standard but if you want a GPU it's a $299 option (256MB NVIDA® GeForce™ Go 7800).

I agree with your post (GMA950 MacBook and X1300 MacBook Pro with a $300-400 gap between them), but your comparison isn't so good. Paying $300 for X1300 is a far cry from paying $300 for the fastest mobile video card available today.

[Voch]

Originally Posted by mduell

Paying $300 for X1300 is a far cry from paying $300 for the fastest mobile video card available today.

Before folks cry foul over that (I saw it coming, I guess) the $300 price difference in the two Apple models, like the machines in the past, won't be just the video chip necessarily. Apple will kick in a 20GB HD bump and bundle something-or-other, offer a widget (backlit keyboard), etc. With Apple there are set tiered models (with BTO options here-and-ther) whereas Dell has suggested models that are a little more configurable. It's just different sales models.

I'm going to duck before things are thrown at me now. G'night.

Voch

[Dumbo]

I'm still not convinced the 13" MBP will happen, but if anythong this whole Intel shared graphics thing has made it more likely. The 13" MB could have shared graphics and a 1.67GHz Core Duo, the 13" MBP could offer a X1300 and a 1.83GHz Core Duo. There's still a problem. Where does the latter fit in price-wise. The 15" MBP is at $1999 and the better MB will probably be $1399. $1599 seems like a good gap between the two MBPs, but the gap between a $1599 MBP and a $1399 MB, seems rather narrow.

[im_noahselby]

I have this gut feeling that Apple will release 3 MacBook configurations and hold off on a 13-inch? MacBook Pro configuration for awhile.

13" MB - $999 - 1.5 Core Solo
13" MB - $1299 - integrated iSight / 1.6 Core Solo
13" MB - $1599 - integrated iSight / 1.6 Core Duo

Noah

[Cory Bauer]

Voch and I (and maybe others of you as well) have been discussing this over at Apple Insider. This is the breakdown I feel is most likely:

$999 MacBook
1.5Ghz Intel Core Solo
13" Widscreen display at 1280x800
512MB memory (667MHz DDR2 SDRAM)
40GB Serial ATA hard drive
Intel GMA950 graphics processor
Combo Drive (DVD-ROM/CD-RW)
Built-in AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0
Apple Remote


$1,199 MacBook
1.66Ghz Intel Core Solo
13" Widscreen display at 1280x800
512MB memory (667MHz DDR2 SDRAM)
60GB Serial ATA hard drive
Intel GMA950 graphics processor
Slot-load SuperDrive (DVD±RW/CD-RW)
Built-in AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0
Apple Remote


$1,499 MacBook Pro
1.66Ghz Intel Core Duo
13" Widscreen display at 1280x800
512MB memory (667MHz DDR2 SDRAM)
80GB Serial ATA hard drive
ATI Mobility Radeon X1300 with 64MB GDDR3 memory
Slot-load SuperDrive (DVD±RW/CD-RW)
Built-in AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0
Apple Remote

Give or take $100 each. All models would also include a built-in iSight. These specs seem well spaced from eachother and the current $1,999 MacBook Pro. To me at least.

[Eug Wanker]

I soooooooo hope the MacBook isn't going to be saddled with the GMA 950.

P.S. My university shop (Toronto) is having a firesale on the G4 PowerBooks. G4, may ye rest in peace.

[Voch]

Cory's ideas make sense to me (I'm not in the "Apple is teh sux0r for no ATI GPU" crowd, I guess, but will eat my words if I ever try to play a 3D game of any seriousness). I'm hoping for Gigabit ethernet and DVI output across the lines. That $1199/$1299 MB would be mine and would be a great Java dev notebook. Anyone think the lack of dedicated GPU would give the non-pro MacBook better battery life maybe?

Voch

[x user]

Apple has NEVER that I can remeber used different GPU's in the same line of computers at the same time. I highly doubt they will start now, it's just too confusing to the average buyer. Like I said b4:

MacBook in two configurations:

CoreSolo 1.5
ComboDrive
Intel Graphics
Built in iSight
$999

CoreSolo 1.6
Superdrive
Intel Graphics
Built in iSight
$1199

And the MBP 13"
CoreDuo 1.6 or 1.8
Superdrive
ATi X1600 (I hope)
Built in iSight
Backlit keyboard
$1699


Not what I want to see, but what I realistically expect. There might be a intermediate model with CoreDuo at 1.6 (Which would force the MBP up to 1.8) but it'd still probably have the Intel Graphics. That is the only way Apple will keep the iBook at the price point.

On the other hand, maybe Apple will stick the name iBook with all the low-end stuff, have a Mac Book in the midrange, and keep the high end the MBP?

[Voch]

Originally Posted by x user

Apple has NEVER that I can remeber used different GPU's in the same line of computers at the same time.

The PowerBook G4 12" had an nVidia GeForce FX Go5200 64MB and at the same time the PowerBook G4 15" and 17" had ATI Mobility Radeon 9700 with 128MB. Unless you're talking about the iBook, then I think you're right (Radeon 9550s at one time, Radeon 9200s before that, etc.)

Voch

[x user]

You are right... the iBooks also had the ATi Video, I guess I always considered the 12" PB a unit of it's own since it shares so few features with the other PB's... wierd since I own a rev B that I didn't think of that. Still I doubt Apple will take that road.

[volcano]

Either way, I'm selling my 12" 1.33GHz iBook now so I can get the best market price before the new models are introduced. I'm hoping for a 13" MacBook Pro. I refuse to buy a 12" Powerbook due to it's low-resolution screen. It's been the red-headed stepchild of the Powerbook line for nearly a year, not seeing any updates whatsoever - so I'm expecting a major update this April.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Cory Bauer

$999 MacBook
1.5Ghz Intel Core Solo
13" Widscreen display at 1280x800
512MB memory (667MHz DDR2 SDRAM)
40GB Serial ATA hard drive
Intel GMA950 graphics processor
Combo Drive (DVD-ROM/CD-RW)
Built-in AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0
Apple Remote

$1,199 MacBook
1.66Ghz Intel Core Solo
13" Widscreen display at 1280x800
512MB memory (667MHz DDR2 SDRAM)
60GB Serial ATA hard drive
Intel GMA950 graphics processor
Slot-load SuperDrive (DVD±RW/CD-RW)
Built-in AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0
Apple Remote

$1,499 MacBook Pro
1.66Ghz Intel Core Duo
13" Widscreen display at 1280x800
512MB memory (667MHz DDR2 SDRAM)
80GB Serial ATA hard drive
ATI Mobility Radeon X1300 with 64MB GDDR3 memory
Slot-load SuperDrive (DVD±RW/CD-RW)
Built-in AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0
Apple Remote

I think the SD MB will be $1,299 base and the MBP will have 128MB VRAM.
I hope the 13" MBP has a 1680x1050 option... enough of these stupid low resolutions.

[Dumbo]

MacBook 12"
• Core Solo 1.5GHz, 2 SO-DIMM slots
• 12" 1024x768
• Combo (SD as BTO)
• 60/80/100 GB SATA HD (5400rpm)
• Intel Graphics, 64MB shared, DVI out
• APX & BT 2.0 built in
• 2 USB2, 1 FW400
• iSight
• Remote & FrontRow
starting at $1099

MacBook 13.3"
• Core Duo 1.67GHz, 2 SO-DIMM slots
• 13.3" widescreen
• SuperDrive
• 80/100/120 GB SATA HD (5400rpm)
• Intel Graphics, 64MB shared, DVI out
• APX & BT 2.0 built in
• 2 USB2, 1 FW400
• iSight
• Remote & FrontRow
starting at $1399

MacBook Pro 13.3"
• Core Duo 1.83GHz, 2 SO-DIMM slots
• 13.3" widescreen
• SuperDrive
• 80/100/120 GB SATA HD (5400rpm)
• ATI X1300, 64MB, DVI out
• APX & BT 2.0 built in
• 2 USB2, 1 FW400
• ExpressCard/34
• iSight
• Remote & FrontRow
starting at $1699

MacBook Pro 17"
• Core Duo 2.16GHz, 2 SO-DIMM slots
• 17" widescreen
• SuperDrive
• 100GB SATA HD (7200rpm) /120 GB SATA HD (5400rpm)
• ATI X1600, 256MB, DVI out
• APX & BT 2.0 built in
• 2 USB2, 1 FW400
• ExpressCard/34
• iSight
• Remote & FrontRow
starting at $2999

[Voch]

Originally Posted by Dumbo

MacBook 12"
MacBook 13.3"
MacBook Pro 13.3"
MacBook Pro 17"

Sounds reasonable.

Voch

[mgl]

If there's still a 12", which I doubt, I don't think it will be $100 more. The price went up on the mini because Apple bundled the wireless options into the base model. There's no such change necessary for the iBook replacement, and if it goes to Intel graphics, Apple will save money anyway. If there is not a 12" base model iBook replacement, then yes, I think we could see a $100 increase on the new 13" model. I think that would be a bad thing in terms of sales. It will start getting rather pricey for schools.

[Voch]

A good point is made in this MacRumors forum thread (post #236). The G4 Mac mini has a Radeon 9200 GPU and the Intel GMA950 in the Intel mini could be considered a step forward spec-wise (at least for 2D stuff). The G4 iBook, however, has a Radeon 9550 (essentially a downclocked, smaller RAM Radeon 9600?) and the Intel GMA950 could be considered step backward if it were to be used in an Intel iBook replacement. Hmmm...

[andreas_g4]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

I soooooooo hope the MacBook isn't going to be saddled with the GMA 950.

Seems we're in the same boat here. My problem is, that I really want a laptop again, and since a MBP is overpowered and overpriced for my needs, I will get a MB even if it has integrated graphics. But it would suck.

[Cory Bauer]

I currently have a 20" 2Ghz iMac G5, and need a secondary machine for portability. I don't want to spend more than $1,499 - as it won't get used a lot - but need something that can do better than 1024x768 and can at least have Motion installed on it (doesn't have to run great - just be installable). I'm hoping Apple comes through for me. An Apple laptop with a resolution above 1024x768 for less than $1,999 is way overdue. Before this I had the original gooseneck iMac G4, and the 1024x768 resolution drove me nuts whenever I attempted to actually do graphics or video work.

Dumbo, the specs you listed are very realistic. I don't know if ExpressCard/34 will fit on a 13.3" model - I hope so. Do you think the larger screen and better graphics card is enough to justify the $300 additional cost the current 15" MacBook Pro would carry over your $1,699 model?

[Dumbo]

Originally Posted by Cory Bauer

Dumbo, the specs you listed are very realistic.

Well, to tell you the truth, they aren't exactly mine. I copied them from somebody who's on a temporary macnn holiday right here.

I don't know if ExpressCard/34 will fit on a 13.3" model - I hope so.

I have some doubts myself. Especially after having seen inside pics of the MBP. Mainly I was thinking this could also be another way to differentiate a 13.3" MBP from a 13.3" MB. Just one more thing to prevent the return of the 12" iB/12" PB problem...

Do you think the larger screen and better graphics card is enough to justify the $300 additional cost the current 15" MacBook Pro would carry over your $1,699 model?

Definitely. The 15.4" will offer about 30% more pixels over the 13.3". The GPU is without doubt superior. In the Apple tradition I think this could well value a $300 increase.

[Eug Wanker]

Apple has filed for a trademark for the MacBook name.

[Dave Hagan]

Originally Posted by Dumbo

after having seen inside pics of the MBP

Good point. Although, I think Apple can do better with a different arrangement of the components. On the MacBook Pro, all of the ports are on the sides of the computer, and not at the rear in order to accommodate the notebook's hinge design. If Apple put all of the ports in the rear (like they once used to) and arranged the battery, optical drive, and hard drive differently they might be able able to make it work more easier.

The design Apple might be trying to employ with the laptops may have worked for the G3 & G4 processor, but Intel processors and archicture might be slightly different...nevermind the thermal requirements. I think the iBook replacement with Intel will be quite a different given the prospect of using magnets for the latch, a built-in iSight, and the possibility of an Express Card slot.

[F*ckDell]

Anyone have any ideas on what Job's has planned for the Power Towers? Will it be worth buying or just stick with the quad?

...whats the point of the new iBooks? MBPs run the table for laptops...

[volcano]

Originally Posted by F*ckDell

...whats the point of the new iBooks? MBPs run the table for laptops...

Not everyone can afford the MacBook Pro. Even if they introduce a 13.3" MBP and it starts at the same price as the current 12" Powerbook ($1499), that's still a bit steep for most students and basic consumers, which is exactly the crowd that the iBook (or MacBook) is aiming for. It's also good for those who have a powerhouse at home (like a PowerMac G5 Quad) and don't need every bell and whistle when they're out on the road - just a good, solid laptop to perform basic tasks like word processing, internet browsing, and e-mail.

Personally, I'm hoping to buy a 13.3" MacBook Pro next month. I sold my 12" 1.33GHz iBook the other day because I realized I need more power (and screen resolution) while I'm out and about. The iBook was wonderful for wireless and writing papers on the go, but using Photoshop and Flash became a daunting task when it came to speed and the small 1024 x 768 resolution.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by F*ckDell

Anyone have any ideas on what Job's has planned for the Power Towers? Will it be worth buying or just stick with the quad?

Conroe in the duals, Woodcrest or Kentfield for the quads.

[kilechki]

Well, as I see it, Apple has split its desktop and iPod line-ups in 3 parts :
good compromise (Mini, Shuffle) -> full featured (nano, iMac) -> juggernaught (PM, iPod)

The MacBook appellation seems to point towards a similar structure for the laptops, with a 500$ gap between each model. I don't see Apple bringing its entry price down for its post-iBook models, for it's not the direction they've headed to in the last few years. The market for <$1000 is not profitable enough, and the $1000-$1500 market seems big enough for Apple's needs.

So, my guess on Apple's lineup in september 2006 (after some price adjustments) :

MacBook "Mini", 999$
13" widescreen, 1152x768 (HD minimum)
Core Solo, integrated graphics
FrontRow (incl. remote), No iSight
60Go, 512 Ram, combo

MacBook, 1399$
13" widescreen, 1280x854 (full HD)
Core Duo 1.67, dedicated GPU
iSight, FrontRow
80 Go, 512 Ram, Superdrive
Backlit keyboard?

MacBook Pro, $1999
15" widescreen
Core Duo 2 Ghz
100 Go, 1 Go Ram, Superdrive
etc.

and maybe a 17" MBP, $2499

[Edit : crippled the MB Mini a bit more...]

[slugslugslug]

Originally Posted by kilechki

So, my guess on Apple's lineup in september 2006 (after some price adjustments) :

MacBook "Mini", 999$
13" widescreen, 1152x768 (HD minimum)
Core Solo, integrated graphics
FrontRow (incl. remote), No iSight
60Go, 512 Ram, combo

MacBook, 1399$
13" widescreen, 1280x854 (full HD)
Core Duo 1.67, dedicated GPU
iSight, FrontRow
80 Go, 512 Ram, Superdrive
Backlit keyboard?

...

and maybe a 17" MBP, $2499

Two issues with your prediction:

1) I doubt they'd call something a "mini" if it's not physically smaller than whatever shares its name. If there's a MacBook mini, it'll be an ultralight. I s'pose they could use the same size screen and still go a bit slimmer, but it seems unlikely.

2) I especially doubt they'd use the same screen size with two different resolutions for two MacBook models. It would make each model more expensive to produce.

I'm also inclined to believe that the lowest-priced model will have a combo drive. I was kinda hoping that Apple would make SuperDrives standard across Macs with the shift to Intel, but they didn't with the new mini. I imagine that once the first Blu-ray capable Mac comes out, all subsequent Mac models will be able to burn DVDs.

[money69]

With all this talk of the possibilities of the configurations, anyone have any idea on when they will be announced? We have heard April as speculation, but is there some sort of event planned for April besides Apple's B-day or will it be an announced event like the mini release?

[mduell]

Originally Posted by kilechki

MacBook "Mini", 999$
13" widescreen, 1152x768 (HD minimum)

MacBook, 1399$
13" widescreen, 1280x854 (full HD)

Most 720p content comes at least 1280 wide, so if you want to display it you need the Mini to be 1280x800 (keeping 16:10 as is normal for computers).
Full HD would be 1920x1200 (keeping 16:10 as is normal for computers), and still a bit higher than is reasonably priced in a 13" display; 1680x1050 is do-able (and would be lovely).

Originally Posted by slugslugslug

2) I especially doubt they'd use the same screen size with two different resolutions for two MacBook models. It would make each model more expensive to produce.

Not by much. Heck, Dell will even let you go up to full HD (1920x1200) for $175 on 15 and 17" laptops.

[kilechki]

Originally Posted by mduell

Most 720p content comes at least 1280 wide, so if you want to display it you need the Mini to be 1280x800 (keeping 16:10 as is normal for computers).
Full HD would be 1920x1200 (keeping 16:10 as is normal for computers), and still a bit higher than is reasonably priced in a 13" display; 1680x1050 is do-able (and would be lovely).

You're right, I realised that after I posted...
My intention was to show how Apple could artificially limit the screen size of the "Mini" by crippling its resolution (like it did with the 14" iBook vs 15" PB). Though since no Apple laptop is truely "HD ready" (by Europe's standards), it just does not make sense to use the HD appellation.

At first, I thought that Apple could just sell a 11" MB Mini, but this seems unlikely knowing how ultra-portables are usually high priced machines.
Another option is to have 2 parallel line-ups for each screen size. A $1000 13" MB along a $1500 13"MBP, a $1500 15"MB along a $2000 15"MBP... This does not sound like something Apple would do, though.

Anyway, I can't see how Apple could fit an iSight in a 999$ laptop along a correct screen. There has to be an entry model with the same kind of finish than today's 12" iBook, while a more finished, iMac-like model could emerge to adress the $1200-$1600 market.

[ixus_123]

I love your predicted specs! The only thing I would disagree with is the resolution. Currently I own a G3 clamshell iBook with max resolution of 800 X 600

I know there is an extra 200 pixels in there but I feel that even so, the display might still struggle to display some long vertical windows as my iBook does - extremely annoying when the 'okay' button is off screen.

I really crave 1024 on the vertical, widescreen is a bonus but I'd settle for 1280x1024 standard

Originally Posted by Cory Bauer

Voch and I (and maybe others of you as well) have been discussing this over at Apple Insider. This is the breakdown I feel is most likely:

$999 MacBook
1.5Ghz Intel Core Solo
13" Widscreen display at 1280x800
512MB memory (667MHz DDR2 SDRAM)
40GB Serial ATA hard drive
Intel GMA950 graphics processor
Combo Drive (DVD-ROM/CD-RW)
Built-in AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0
Apple Remote


$1,199 MacBook
1.66Ghz Intel Core Solo
13" Widscreen display at 1280x800
512MB memory (667MHz DDR2 SDRAM)
60GB Serial ATA hard drive
Intel GMA950 graphics processor
Slot-load SuperDrive (DVD±RW/CD-RW)
Built-in AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0
Apple Remote


$1,499 MacBook Pro
1.66Ghz Intel Core Duo
13" Widscreen display at 1280x800
512MB memory (667MHz DDR2 SDRAM)
80GB Serial ATA hard drive
ATI Mobility Radeon X1300 with 64MB GDDR3 memory
Slot-load SuperDrive (DVD±RW/CD-RW)
Built-in AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0
Apple Remote

Give or take $100 each. All models would also include a built-in iSight. These specs seem well spaced from eachother and the current $1,999 MacBook Pro. To me at least.