New macbook 13 a joke?

Intel Core 2 Duo
250GB hard drive
1280x800 screen
etc...

For $1,199.00 in USA but it will be 1,199.00 Euro in Europe of course while 1 euro is 1,362 dollar (double joke)

I waited so long for that... Nice move Apple I was 100% sure to buy the "new" macbook 13 now I completely change my mind.

Someone can advise me a good 13 laptop other than Apple?

 

Go ask in the other sections on what to buy, this is the Apple section.

 

Buy what works for you! Period.

 

13" will be though, the only real performer in that class is the Acer 3820, at about €800 with i5+HD5650 and at 1,7kgs. If you go to 14" however you get a loads of notebooks with the same config as 3820 but with an optical drive for about the same money and at 2,2kgs.

 

Its pretty ridiculous that the 17" comes standard with the Core i5 2.56GHz (540m) and that the it costs more money to upgrade to the Core i7 2.66GHz (620m).. All this while the Top Tier 15" comes standard with the Core i7 2.66GHz (620m)..

 

At least their throwing in the 300m GPU chipsets.

 

I am quite disappointed. 13" without i3 at least?!? Dell, HP, Asus, hell even Sony have added i3/i5 to their 13" inch laptops.

I want an Apple so bad but I just don't know if I can live with C2D at that price.

$1199 for C2D Macbook 13" Pro
$1200 for Dell Vostros 3300 with i3 and better graphics (3 year accidental warranty included!)

Crazy

 

The only things I find offputting are :
- the bad pricing (a 1150 dollars MBP costs 1150 euros here, instead it should cost like 900€ .
- The impossibility of selecting a 7200rpm hard drive in the 13 inch models.

 

You can easily perform the upgrade yourself should be a no issue.
But I have to agree with you that for paying so much a 7200RPM drive should be a norm.

 

Well ofcourse I can make the upgrade for myself but i'd expect the possibility of buying it with the hard drive I want, 7200rpm isn't to much to ask for in 2010 IMO, especialy not for a +1000€ machine.

 

Agreed. Laptops especially those from Apple SHOULD be able to be equipped with i3/i5 and a 7200 RPM hard drive at least.

What happen to Apple standards?

 

Well, they're not.

Suck it up or switch brands.

 

Once again, the Macbook spec bump has not lived up to everyone's expectations. However may I remind everyone that this is no reason to insult other forum members who disagree with your point of view, and further personal insults will not be tolerated.

 

Yes, yes it is a joke.

How in any way or fashion is the 13 inch a "Pro" machine. Pretty sure it's 15 and 17 inch brothers would be disappointed in it.

Apple should take off the "Pro" moniker from the 13 inch.

 

I agree it isn't a "Pro" level machine. It isn't a worthy upgrade.

I am advocating purchasing elsewhere to satisfy your needs.

 

I believe Apple uses the "Pro" label to specify model designs instead of actual components or performance.

Of course, they didn't do that with the first range of unibody Macbooks, but it appears that they are using "Pro" to describle all unibody Macbooks now.

 

"Pro", like "Apple" seems to make the product sell better at and let them put a higher price tag.

 

No need to insult other's opinions. Have some class.

 

Class would be politely nodding, accepting the much anticipated refresh is a bust for you and whoever else and moving along and purchasing elsewhere quietly.

In effect, you have succinctly voted with your purchasing power.

What's done is done. You either try to find a way to adapt to what is being offered by Apple or resign yourself to the potential fact that Apple no longer is
capable of offering the type of hardware you actually need to satisfy your computing needs and reluctantly start spec/price shopping from non-Apple makers.

 

I was pretty set on getting a 13 inch MBP in the summer but now I guess I'll just have to explore other 13-14 inch laptops.

I would have no problem with the 13 not having a ix processor, but at least make it up somehow, like a SSD standard, lowering the price to $1100 etc.

 

Typical Jersey. Rude, ignorant, and arrogant. There is a forum for a reason; to discuss. If you don't like what I am posting, close your eyes.

I'm doing the same here. Apple is simply 2-3 years behind. Dell has offered the same specs Apple just upgraded to years ago.

 

Apple basically took the high end 13" from last week, upped the clock speed, dropped in a better cpu and charged less for it. Still an upgrade, but I was expecting at least a an i3 as well.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/13/asus-u30jc-1a-review/

Looks like what the 13" MBP should have been in the spec department.

 

Now what was that you were saying about a lack of class again?

 

why would you put an i3 in the 13"

I think the Core 2 Duo was a better choice.

the i3 mobiles are barely faster than the Core 2 Duo mobiles

the Core 2 Duo lets them use an nvidia chipset (impossible to do on a Core i3).. which keeps power usage down with decent graphics performance.

If they went to an i3 they would have to either use only Intel HD graphics (serious downgrade in graphics), or add an extra GPU in there, which would not work in the current form factor and design, meaning they'd have to redesign the entire laptop, and probably make it bigger/thicker.

Better graphics is what people always hammer apple on skimping on... so for once they actually make a decision to help keep better graphics on their machine with a slight penalty to CPU performance, and people complain about that too.

 

Meh, my dell xps 13 had a core 2 duo, 250 gb drive, and discrete graphics for $900 ish 3 years go! For $850 you can pick up a 13" adamo with an SSD (albeit no discrete graphics if thats important to you).

 

Its all in your perspective. Yeah but no one mentioned the 10 hour battery life. I think that is great if you compare it to others in its class. The P8800 is a good processor (yes it is last years technology but still holds its own). If you compare it to the Asus UL30VT line it has similar battery life, better processor, better graphics card, better keyboard, better screen, built in optical drive, its is a bit heavier, but a good value if you add things up. I am a bit disappointed with the lack of the core i line, but I think Apple did this to achieve great battery life out of a full powered mobile CPU and not a ULV like the Asus. I know I am comparing Apple to Oranges here but what other 13" notebook can achieve this high battery life with a good processor and GPU?

 

Who cares about i3? For most things it will make little difference, but the supposed 10 hours of battery life is a more tangible benefit.

 

Why couldn't an i3 CPU make use of a discrete GPU?

 

What I want to know is, if you are gaming on it will it sound like a leaf blower? I thought my older Unibody Macbook got a bit loud and hot. I was not too impressed with the 13" Macbook ability to cool itself.

 

C2Ds for the new 13' MacBook? The battery life is the only pro here.

 

i was really hoping to upgrade my 13in macbook unibody to the new 13in but look liek i wont, as i already have a 2.4GHz C2d and 4GB or ram and a 320GB 7200RPM HDD, all teh upgrade would give me is $1,200 for another 5hrs of battery, and a video upgrade. Not worth it IMO.

If it was an i3, 320m, 4gb and a 7200RPM, and 1366x768 I'd get it, but 2 gens later and the only change is battery life, a SD card slot and a video card... that's just terrible.

 

never said it couldn't. I said that if they went to i3 they'd have to use the intel HD graphics, or add a dedicated GPU (discrete GPU)... which would be a major overhaul and design change, not an easy bump in performance.

What i said is they i3 cannot use an nvidia chipset. a chipset is not a GPU.

The new 13" is using an intel CPU with a nvidia chipset with built in nvidia graphics.

The new 15 and 17s are using an Intel CPU with an Intel chipset with intel integrated graphics as well as a nvidia GPU.

This is the first time they have went back to an Intel chipset in the Macbook lines since they first started using 9400Ms.

Intel is in legal battles with nvidia, and will not allow nvidia to make chipsets that can run any Core i3, i5 or i7... nvidia chipsets cannot run anything newer than a Core 2 Duo.

 

Probably they are on the same chip, different dies.

 

Would have been nice had they given us an option to upgrade the screen resolution on the new 13" Macbook Pros. With a SSD in the current Macbook Pro the Macbook Pro is actually quite quick.

 

My mistake I misread what you were saying So basically anything newer then a C2D cannot use integrated Nivdia graphics. I never knew that.

 

Sorry I don't think that's right, the 13" should have i3 as a base and i5 as the top of the range. Both the i3 and i5 outperform their equivalent C2D by some margin.

The issue here is arrandale forcing Intel's integrated graphics which would be a step back. Equally Apple are dead set against including a dedicated card on the 13" model (they never have). Battery life would equally suffer if they went down this route.

Slight flaw is their choice of the Pro label on the 13" model. Bottom line is here in the UK the MBP 13" now costs £999, not far off over £150 price rise (they hiked the prices before the update as well) for a laptop with a 4 year old CPU and a now outdated nVidia chipset.

I would imagine they'll switch eventually when nVidia Optimus is available and we'll see i3/i5. Intel are about to phase out production of C2D apart from SLV models.

As far as the graphics the 320m is an improvement but not a substantial one over the 9400.

Apple are pretty much alone now in trying to pass off ancient technology as 'new'. Shame really as their 15/17 inch updates are a nice improvement. Apple never put absolute cutting edge technology in their laptops despite their claims.

 

Apple explains lack of Core i3 support in new MacBook Pro

 

I still see no reason they could not have used a i3 and 310. There are many Core i's out there with the 310.

The 15in is a JOKE, the Sony CW has 2.4 i5, 4GB or ram, 1600x900, 14in, bluray, 500GB HDD, 330m with 512MB. To get the 330 512mb, 500GB HDD you need to get the 2200 macbook.

 

That's a BS answer, because it doesn't give 50% increase? it still gives 15-20%, that's still an upgrade at a lower power usage.

 

While I agree that its a little disappointing, I think people need to take a bit of a chill pill. The iSeries of cpu's was only released 3months ago. Tight supply has restricted there uptake, so if you go shopping today at your local bestbuy, or what ever there are still alot of laptops with a c2d or worse. If you have a unibody mac, then there isn't much need to upgrade, if you have anything older then hay these will be about as fast as anything else out there, have amazing battery life and excellent design.
Not your cup of tea fine, don't spend your $$ at an apple store...problem solved.
a

 

Then surely that should hold true with the base 15" model as well, oh hold on...

Trying to dress up a 4 year old CPU as a good move is just daft. More likely they don't want to go back to integrated Intel and a dedicated GPU might well require a substantial redesign.

The price hike makes it even more unsustainable.

Every test shows the i3/i5/i7 to be comfortably ahead of the equivalent C2D and offer the same or slightly improved power management.

Frankly I'd rather have a substantial CPU improvement over a marginal GPU improvement when we're talking about integrated graphics anyway.

 

Yeah you're right, just wanted to buy a 13" today. It's the price hike more than the identical spec that's bugging me as much as anything. The whole MBP range is looking pretty expensive now as opposed to a year or two ago.

 

^^^
I was toying with the idea of upgrading my 13" as well, prior today, but thankfully apple has just saved me 1200€ which I dont have !
Thanks apple

 

The BMW of laptop computers Not sure about the US but here in Asia but for those that have Apple computers or products is like a Chinese chick carrying a LV Bag

 

I wonder if they tweaked the settings to get longer battery life or if they upgraded the last battery with a larger one on the 13" ones. 3 hours more is a significant more amount of time.

 

It's a joke but it's apple. Everyone will still buy their products even if it trumps functionality (ipad for example)

 

I agree. 10 hr. battery life out of this combo CPU/GPU is impressive. I just want to know how cool it is running. CPU/GPU well under 80 C while gaming or ripping movies is what I am looking for.

 

Fixed it for you.

 

i bet it's a battery change, tweaks, and the better CPU/GPU power settings.

 

The 13 inch MBP is what got me onto the topic of a new laptop a few months ago. No way am I paying a premium for anything but an i5. I had high hopes the 13 inch would receive a processor upgrade.

So, I either buy the 15 inch which is larger than I want, or I stay with Windows and get a Vaio Z. These two end up being the same price (actually, MBP would be more because I also need Windows), and I am really not sure what the 15 inch MBP offers that the Sony does not, especially considering the Sony has SSDs in RAID 0. Not sure if the Mac OS is worth the premium...