[polendo]

Somewhere i read that snow leopard will free about 6GB of space vs leopard. That doesn´t exactly mean it will be lighter on the processor, but certainly looks promising.

[ajprice]

A lot of that 6gb will probable be from removing power pc code and leaving out printer drivers. If you get an app like X Slimmer you can take a lot out of your own system by removing ppc code and international langoages from the system and apps.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by SamGuy 

I just bought a 2.26 13" MacBook Pro to replace my 2.0 13" MacBook Unibody (that i received May 19th)

First thing i noticed was that the viewing angle was worse on the new one. a black background isn't even as uniformly black as the MacBook. When looking straight at the screen, the bottom appears brownish. The more i 'look down' at the screen, certain lighter colors invert themselves pretty badly. But then again, the screen in the 13" MacBook Unibody was quietly upgraded mid-April.

THIRDLY (and Most Importantly?) - Despite stating the same model info in system profiler, the Serial ATA bus on my 13" MacBook Pro is back down to 1.5 Gigabit (it was 3.0 Gigabit on the 2.0 unibody. this has me in a tizzy)

1. That's really disappointing; I hope it's a one-off issue.
3. ITYM least importantly.

[iomatic]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Once again: NO, THEY CANNOT.

OK, like what?

[SamGuy]

Originally Posted by mduell 

1. That's really disappointing; I hope it's a one-off issue.
3. ITYM least importantly.

The color is definitely different. So i take back my negative remarks about the viewing angles until i can compare them when the color profiles (?) are the same. The new LCDs are definitely better than the original unibody screens though.

Originally Posted by polendo 

Somewhere i read that snow leopard will free about 6GB of space vs leopard. That doesn´t exactly mean it will be lighter on the processor, but certainly looks promising.

it basically does mean that, if you also happened to read how/why 6GB is being freed up. They're streamlining the OS. It's pretty much guaranteed to run faster on same spec hardware as 10.5 - this really isn't worth questioning or arguing. come on

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by iomatic 

OK, like what?

Anything that requires performance and/or reliability greater than what USB 2.0 can provide?

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by iomatic 

OK, like what?

Anything that requires large bandwidth ON TIME.

External storage is all well and fine, but if you're piping a couple dozen channels of high-resolution audio, or several channels of uncompressed HD video across a bus for production work, then EVERY SINGLE BIT needs to arrive EXACTLY ON TIME, GUARANTEED, else the project is ruined and, if you're lucky, you're out of a job - or a career, if you're unlucky and the glitch was due to bad judgement.

A guy on Slashdot summarized the problem with USB better than I could:

by alienw (585907) <alienw...slashdot@@@gmail...com> on Friday October 17, @12:15PM (#25413835)
Well, I think the main problem with the audio industry and USB is that USB is completely, absolutely horrible for audio. Really, that standard seems to have been designed by retards. It works OK for low-quality, low-bitrate things like speakers and microphones and headsets. However, the streaming model is terrible, and almost completely unsuited to professional audio. There is no way to reserve bandwidth (except in isochronous mode, which doesn't have error detection or recovery), it's very hard to use asynchronous clocks, and it's almost impossible to have low latency (due to the previous issue). Therefore, most USB soundcards run in synchronous mode, where the sample clock of the soundcard is locked to the USB clock. This, of course, is completely unsuitable for professional audio.

This is also why Firewire is so important. If you're really using large amounts of bandwidth, though, it is prudent to keep storage and I/O hardware on completely separate busses. Hence one need for an expansion slot.

Also, the example I use again and again because I actually see it in my colleagues' studios, is the Magma expansion chassis - the only way to continue to run legacy PCI cards on newer machines. If you've got a couple thousand invested in dedicated audio DSP cards and an appropriate chassis that you just had to upgrade to ExpressCard a very short time ago, being told to switch to USB is just stupid.

[Salty]

Who knows they might keep it on the 17 inch?

Aside from that I'm leaning towards a 15 inch for my next laptop though I adore my 13 inch MacBook. Either way soon as these go Quad I'm getting one.

Lastly I would love to see Apple come out with a 15 or 17 inch line above the MacBook Pros that doesn't sacrifice anything for the attempt to be thin. They could even ruggidize the thing like a tough book. Integrate a handle in it. Make it non-sexy but well designed. Have the thing look tough and pro, not svelte and pro.

[iomatic]

But the new books have Firewire...

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by iomatic 

But the new books have Firewire...

Yes, that's the savings grace.

Otherwise, Apple notebooks would be dead for the music producing industry.

-t

[mduell]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

Anything that requires performance and/or reliability greater than what USB 2.0 can provide?

What reliability issues do you have with USB?

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Anything that requires large bandwidth ON TIME.

External storage is all well and fine, but if you're piping a couple dozen channels of high-resolution audio, or several channels of uncompressed HD video across a bus for production work, then EVERY SINGLE BIT needs to arrive EXACTLY ON TIME, GUARANTEED, else the project is ruined and, if you're lucky, you're out of a job - or a career, if you're unlucky and the glitch was due to bad judgement.

What interface were you using on the 15" MBP for several channels of uncompressed HD (1.5Gbps/channel?) video?

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

A guy on Slashdot summarized the problem with USB better than I could:

He's complaining that consumer oriented sound cards have design choices that make them unsuitable for pro audio? And this is a problem?

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

This is also why Firewire is so important. If you're really using large amounts of bandwidth

If you're really using large amounts of bandwith, like the uncompressed HD video you mentioned earlier, Firewire as implemented in the MBPs is completely insufficient.

[iomatic]

If you're dead serious about critical, studio-quality, on time data delivery, would you bother with a laptop, though?

[Big Mac]

If the laptop could handle it, I suppose you would.

[amazing]

Gizmodo, at least, is saying that the new screen is better.

Gizmodo - MacBook Pro 2009 Review - Macbook pro review

The improvement in battery life is substantial and very welcome!

[Simon]

I like the new 13" MBP, I really do.

That said, I don't really understand how Apple thought the 'Pro' moniker would apply after that update.

IMHO this is what the 13" MB to 13" MBP transition would have looked like:

Get rid of internal optical -> gain space -> use space to
- reduce ludicrously large bezel around the screen
- install a 9600 plus its fan
- add EC/34 slot
Then increase resolution to 1440x900. If any space is left over increase internal battery size.

That IMHO would have been the perfect 13" MBP. Smaller and lighter than the previous MacBook, as powerful as the previous 15" MBP. And even though it's small and sexy, it's still expandable.

The only downside is that they couldn't have priced this thing at $1199. They could have however left that slot to the 13" MB (no 9600, lower res, bigger case).

[iomatic]

I think you'll see something like that with the next iteration of the Air. There are single-digit amounts of people actually using the ExpressCard slot; GET OVER IT!

[Simon]

There are single-digit amounts of people getting over it.

If there's anything we have learned from the past it is that Apple listens...







...to this board. If only you pollute every thread about a new Mac with stuff like "where the fsck did feature xyz go? Apple is doomed w/o it..." and bitch about it for long enough, they'll put it back in next revision.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by mduell 

What interface were you using on the 15" MBP for several channels of uncompressed HD (1.5Gbps/channel?) video?

I don't do video.

Originally Posted by mduell 

He's complaining that consumer oriented sound cards have design choices that make them unsuitable for pro audio? And this is a problem?

Read it again:

He's complaining that THE DESIGNERS OF THE USB STANDARD made design choices that make USB unsuitable for pro audio.

This *is* a problem.

Originally Posted by mduell 

If you're really using large amounts of bandwith, like the uncompressed HD video you mentioned earlier, Firewire as implemented in the MBPs is completely insufficient.

So for a portable machine, Expresscard would be an absolute necessity? Or is a MacBook Pro generally unsuited to handling video material that would exceed the bandwidth of a single FireWire 800 bus? (again, I don't do video).

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by iomatic 

I think you'll see something like that with the next iteration of the Air. There are single-digit amounts of people actually using the ExpressCard slot;

Unfortunately, these are the actual "pros" Apple claims to be marketing these machines at.

[iomatic]

So… they should remanufacture their machines to appease the 5-9 people using it, versus the hundreds of thousands of others? Whew, glad you don't work at Apple marketing.

[Spheric Harlot]

No - they should make pro machines marketed at media professionals, and consumer machines marketed at consumers.

As it is, they're building "pro-sumer" machines marketed at consumers with too much disposable income at serious hobbyists, and at professionals with limited needs, and one "pro" machine, for which they've just upped the entry price by €500, and the weight by 500g, and the size by 3 cm in two dimensions.

[SierraDragon]

Originally Posted by iomatic 

...There are single-digit amounts of people actually using the ExpressCard slot; GET OVER IT!

We "single-digit amounts of people actually using the ExpressCard slot" are the professionals for whom the high end pro Macbook Pro is necessary. (A) I do not think we are that small a market segment, and (B) even if we are, we are opinion leaders very important to Apple MBP marketing.

-Allen Wicks

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by SierraDragon 

(A) I do not think we are that small a market segment, and (B) even if we are, we are opinion leaders very important to Apple MBP marketing.

-Allen Wicks

Yes, very important to Apple...




Apple's bottom line. You have the "privilege" to buy Apple's most expensive laptop, the 17".

-t

[iomatic]

Originally Posted by SierraDragon 

We "single-digit amounts of people actually using the ExpressCard slot" are the professionals for whom the high end pro Macbook Pro is necessary. (A) I do not think we are that small a market segment, and (B) even if we are, we are opinion leaders very important to Apple MBP marketing.

-Allen Wicks

Come on, man. You have to define "professional" under Apple's terms. "We" may not use much audio at all. "We" may use the SD slot more often (Leica M8 users, Nikon D300 users, point-and-shoot users), than we need real-time audio bitrates???

In fact, maybe the prosumer market is the most profitable, the least definable market segment in which the features they've picked this June is what will sell best. I surely have a lot of faith that Apple gets its market pretty well. Remember when people went up in arms when the first candy iMacs were introduced—when there was only USB (and Firewire)? Do you remember how freaked out everyone was about the lack of serial, parallel, "WHAT ABOUT MY ADB DEVICES?? MY SCSI!!!!" Apple surely makes mistakes, but in sum total, they seem to make the best long-term maneuvers. Mostly.

I just want to make sure though, that you guys have known me long enough that I'm not flame-baiting. Just putting out some thoughts.

[Big Mac]

The original iMacs only had USB, which was a mistake.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

The original iMacs only had USB, which was a mistake.

USB was technically a better spec than the connectors it replaced. The same cannot be said for the SD card slot and the EC slot.

[slugslugslug]

USB was not better than SCSI in some overarching sense. Better for some things yes, but not on a computer that had no means of connecting high-speed high-capacity storage.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by slugslugslug 

USB was not better than SCSI in some overarching sense. Better for some things yes, but not on a computer that had no means of connecting high-speed high-capacity storage.

Didn't know it replaced SCSI - thought it only replaced the ADB ports.

[iomatic]

FireWire was the SCSI replacement. I meant to type "(and later, Firewire)".

But I certainly see the point of ExpressCard removal as a backwards step— don't get me wrong. I also see the majority of people never using it (I had that great Griffin SD reader in one of my old MBPs that had the SD CARD SIT FLUSH!!! So yeah, I used it, but there was always an alternative (FireWire card reader == faster).)

[Eug]

AnandTech: The Best Battery Life I’ve Ever Seen

"Eight, freakin, hours."

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by jokell82 

Didn't know it replaced SCSI - thought it only replaced the ADB ports.

It did - and as a result you couldn't hook up a backup drive that wasn't dog slow, or a CD burner that wouldn't give you buffer underrun errors every time if you didn't turn the burning speed down to the minimum (which novice users couldn't be expected to know to do).

[Eug]

[Brien]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

No - they should make pro machines marketed at media professionals, and consumer machines marketed at consumers.

As it is, they're building "pro-sumer" machines marketed at consumers with too much disposable income at serious hobbyists, and at professionals with limited needs, and one "pro" machine, for which they've just upped the entry price by €500, and the weight by 500g, and the size by 3 cm in two dimensions.

Try hanging around some of the other online Apple-oriented websites and you'll soon learn Apple knows all too well the "consumers with too much disposable income" buying the MacBook Pro.

[Eug]

I went to get a new 13" MacBook Pro today, with a Mini-DisplayPort --> VGA adapter (and free iPod touch).

The guy there said they had adapters in stock, but the old mini-DP->VGA adapter wouldn't work on the new MBPs, and they were waiting for the new shipment of adapters to arrive (next week).

That didn't sound right to me. Can anyone confirm either way? Maybe he was just mixing up mini-DVI for the WhiteBooks not working on MBPs?

[CharlesS]

Probably. The video card is the same as the old ones, so I can't imagine that the adapters would be different.

[SierraDragon]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

...Apple's bottom line. You have the "privilege" to buy Apple's most expensive laptop, the 17". -t

Yes, and as long as the 17" (or bigger) is maximum competent I personally will remain satisfied. I whine on these boards about things like loss of the EC slot and loss of the matte display on all laptops but the 17" mostly out of fear that Apple may at some point also downgrade the 17" MBP.

And, Apple has shortchanged those many users with pro needs who do prefer the 15" size.

-Allen Wicks

[Brien]

Originally Posted by SierraDragon 

Yes, and as long as the 17" (or bigger) is maximum competent I personally will remain satisfied. I whine on these boards about things like loss of the EC slot and loss of the matte display on all laptops but the 17" mostly out of fear that Apple may at some point also downgrade the 17" MBP.
-Allen Wicks

This is exactly my fear too. They didn't really upgrade the 17", just dropped the price.

[TribeLeader]

I've been following this thread, so I apologize if this has been answered here/elsewhere, but my question is, approximately how long does it take to receive a MBP when ordered/configured at apple.com? I can't remember from the first time I ordered almost 6 years ago.

I realize the site says "ships within 24 hours" or "... 1-2 days" but am not sure if that applies to systems that are built to order.

Thanks!

[Brien]

My 2.8GHz MBP was a CTO and I got it in like 3 days.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Brien 

My 2.8GHz MBP was a CTO and I got it in like 3 days.

Where did it come from though? I see you live in SoCal.

I've gotten stuff from Apple in a few days from China, and sometimes it's taken over a week from the US. I'm in Canada.

[Brien]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Where did it come from though? I see you live in SoCal.

I've gotten stuff from Apple in a few days from China, and sometimes it's taken over a week from the US. I'm in Canada.

It was direct from China, so I'd imagine you would get it in 2-3 days as well.

[Eug]

I (hope I) will get mine a few hours after I "order" it, since I'm gonna pick it up in person.

The brick & mortar Apple Store has a service where you can make an appointment to see an Apple sales rep. You give your list of items in advance, and then just show up to pick them up at the appointed time, so you don't have to stand around waiting during busy store hours.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by TribeLeader 

I've been following this thread, so I apologize if this has been answered here/elsewhere, but my question is, approximately how long does it take to receive a MBP when ordered/configured at apple.com? I can't remember from the first time I ordered almost 6 years ago.

I realize the site says "ships within 24 hours" or "... 1-2 days" but am not sure if that applies to systems that are built to order.

Thanks!

I ordered mine about an hour after the store came back online after the WWDC keynote, and I just got the shipping notice today.

[TribeLeader]

Thanks for the replies.

It looks like I'll have to wait till after my vacation (that starts in a week) to order. Don't want it sitting on my porch while I'm gone!

[Simon]

Originally Posted by Simon 

That said, the chipset supports 3Gbps SATA so I expect this to be buggy reporting in SP.

It might also be the new firmware indeed throttling SATA to 1.5Gbps.

13" and 15" MacBook Pros Have a Slower SATA Interface - Mac Rumors


Old MB (left) vs. new MBP (right) using the same 128GB OCZ Vertex SSD.

1.) It appears nearly certain that the new 13" and 15" MacBook Pros are all reporting a SATA interface running at 1.5Gb and not the faster 3.0Gb rate that has been in pretty common use for the last few years. These new models have the Secure Digital (SD) slot and also appear to have redesigned motherboards.

2.) Those who are using standard hard disk drives will probably see no difference in performance. If that is you, you can stop reading now.

3.) Benchmarks on FAST solid-state drives (SSDs) are showing a decrease in RAW disk i/o transfer rates on these same systems (in comparison to the previous generation MacBook Pros and MacBooks).

4.) The largest differences in the benchmark results seem to be in large, sequential disk READS (one of the traditional strengths with SSDs).

5.) To the best of my knowledge, no one has done any test with REAL-WORLD operations to show that the user experience (i.e. "performance") will be decreased with the 1.5Gb SATA interface. That is to say that thus far we've only seen benchmarks done with RAW disk i/o benchmarking tools.

6.) No one really knows why this has been done and no one knows whether it can be fixed with a software/firmware update (it may or may not be able to be fixed).

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Eug 

I went to get a new 13" MacBook Pro today, with a Mini-DisplayPort --> VGA adapter (and free iPod touch).

The guy there said they had adapters in stock, but the old mini-DP->VGA adapter wouldn't work on the new MBPs, and they were waiting for the new shipment of adapters to arrive (next week).

That didn't sound right to me. Can anyone confirm either way? Maybe he was just mixing up mini-DVI for the WhiteBooks not working on MBPs?

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

Probably. The video card is the same as the old ones, so I can't imagine that the adapters would be different.

Weird. I just called the Apple Store, and they continue to claim the 13" MacBook Pro is getting a new Mini-DP-->VGA adapter. The person there could not confirm if the old one would work or not, but says that there is nonetheless a new one coming.

So, I will wait for the new one.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by Simon 

It might also be the new firmware indeed throttling SATA to 1.5Gbps.

13" and 15" MacBook Pros Have a Slower SATA Interface - Mac Rumors

1.) It appears nearly certain that the new 13" and 15" MacBook Pros are all reporting a SATA interface running at 1.5Gb and not the faster 3.0Gb rate that has been in pretty common use for the last few years. These new models have the Secure Digital (SD) slot and also appear to have redesigned motherboards.

2.) Those who are using standard hard disk drives will probably see no difference in performance. If that is you, you can stop reading now.

3.) Benchmarks on FAST solid-state drives (SSDs) are showing a decrease in RAW disk i/o transfer rates on these same systems (in comparison to the previous generation MacBook Pros and MacBooks).

4.) The largest differences in the benchmark results seem to be in large, sequential disk READS (one of the traditional strengths with SSDs).

5.) To the best of my knowledge, no one has done any test with REAL-WORLD operations to show that the user experience (i.e. "performance") will be decreased with the 1.5Gb SATA interface. That is to say that thus far we've only seen benchmarks done with RAW disk i/o benchmarking tools.

6.) No one really knows why this has been done and no one knows whether it can be fixed with a software/firmware update (it may or may not be able to be fixed).

Looks like this only applies if you configured your machine with an HD. SSD configs get the 3.0Gb interface, according to this Engadget post:
New MacBook Pros shipped with HDDs only have 1.5Gbps SATA enabled

[Simon]

Interesting. Does this happen on the fly? What kind of SATA speed do you get when you put an SSD into a Mac that came with a HDD?

[iomatic]

We'll find out tomorrow when I install the Intel SSD.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by Simon 

Interesting. Does this happen on the fly? What kind of SATA speed do you get when you put an SSD into a Mac that came with a HDD?

No. If you did that the SSD would still have the 1.5Gb interface.