• This forum is for posting news stories or links from rumor sites. When you start a thread, please include a link to the site you're referencing.

    THIS IS NOT A FORUM TO ASK "WHAT IF?" TYPE QUESTIONS.

    THIS IS NOT A FORUM FOR ASKING QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW TO USE YOUR MAC OR SOFTWARE.

    This is a NEWS and RUMORS forum as the name implies. If your thread is neither of those things, then please find the appropriate forum to ask your question.

    If you don't have a link to a news story, do not post the thread here.

    If you don't follow these rules, then your post may be deleted.

Apple's thinner 13- & 15-inch MacBook Pros expected in April at the soonest

Joined
Feb 27, 2011
Messages
186
Reaction score
9
Points
18
Your Mac's Specs
'11 15.4, 2.2, 8gb MBP - '11 15.4, 2.0, 8gb MBP, 2x4gb Gen1 Nano, 8gb Gen3 Nano,
The MBA is designed to be portable, it is not supposed to be a "Pro" machine. But I still believe it deserves some respect considering its size it is very good at what it does. Plus when you add a external display you can get more USB ports, another Thunderbolt, and a Firewire

Only if it is an Apple display. IMO the Apple displays are not a great choice if quality color is needed.
 
Joined
Sep 30, 2007
Messages
9,962
Reaction score
1,235
Points
113
Location
The Republic of Neptune
Your Mac's Specs
2019 iMac 27"; 2020 M1 MacBook Air; macOS up-to-date... always.
I think the hi-rez (anti glare thank you) one is enough right now. Put an "retina" display on a MBP and expect your battery life to plummet in no time! On an iMac however.... Yeah, I could go for that! That would be a photographers/video editors *** dream.

The iPad doubled its resolution, added LTE, and maintained a 10 hour battery life. Of course the battery holds about 30% more juice to compensate, but surely the improvements in battery capacity can be carried over. The pixel density on MacBooks and iMacs is already closer than people realize to what it'd need to be to meet the fuzzy definition for Retina Display, and it's not necessary to quadruple the pixel density to avoid upscaling and interpolating graphics because OS X is not (exclusively) a full-screen OS in the first place. More about all that here:
Retina display Macs, iPads, and HiDPI: Doing the Math (updated) | TUAW - The Unofficial Apple Weblog

Personally… I see the optical drive going away; the display increasing in resolution; and the battery capacity increasing. I doubt Firewire is going away this quickly, especially given the dearth of Thunderbolt devices thus far. Maybe the MBP will be thinner/lighter due to space saving from removing the optical drive, or maybe that space will be left as available for an SSD. I doubt they'll use the space savings for a bigger battery… a battery of the same size that is more efficient like that in the new iPad should be sufficient for the relatively modest bump to the screen resolution that would be needed as per the article above.

Of course maybe that speculation is wrong and perhaps Apple will quadruple the pixel density. If they did, that would leave options open for multiple "native" resolutions. Let's take the 21" iMac at 1920x1080. If the resolution became 3840x2160, you could switch to the following resolutions and still look as good as if they were native: 1920x1080, 1280x720, and 960x540. Right now, with a native resolution of 1920x1080, the only resolution that cleanly goes into that is 960x640. A quadrupled density leaves room for an intermediate resolution of 1280x720 that perhaps someone with poorer eyesight would better appreciate. This could also lead Apple to locking in the available display resolutions to those 4 combinations so they can optimize the UI elements in OS X to only work with those. Or maybe they won't. *shrug* We'll see.
 

BrianLachoreVPI


Retired Staff
Joined
Feb 24, 2011
Messages
3,733
Reaction score
124
Points
63
Location
Maryland
Your Mac's Specs
March 2011 15" MBP 2.3GHz i7 Quad Core 8GB Ram | Mid 2011 27" iMac 3.4 GHz i7 16 GB RAM 2 TB HDD
I'd like to see USB 3.0 - and yes - I do think that's possible - even with Thunderbolt on board.
 
Joined
Mar 10, 2012
Messages
86
Reaction score
1
Points
8
Your Mac's Specs
iPhone 4S, MacPro 3.3 GHz 6 Core Intel Xeon /6GB RAM OSX 10.8.2, 27" display,i AirPort Extreme
Drives and the future MBP

I would have normally disagreed about the lack of an optical drive but since mine is broken, I've gotten very good at learning how to get content without it.



Out of curiosity, what happened to your drive? I recall Apple had big time issues with drivers on some MBP models so severe some disks wouldn't load and you couldn't burn anything. One particular drive model I believe and there was a firmware fix.

As to ports on my portable: I hook up a lot of peripherals so I'm happy with my firewire 800/400 and a couple USB's. When my software doesn't come on or have to be loaded from CD's and DVD's I'll do without the optical drive.

Any thoughts on USB-3?
 

vansmith

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
19,924
Reaction score
559
Points
113
Location
Queensland
Your Mac's Specs
Mini (2014, 2018, 2020), MBA (2020), iPad Pro (2018), iPhone 13 Pro Max, Watch (S6)
I have a four year old MB with a slot loading optical drive - the fact that it's broken was inevitable.
 
Joined
Mar 10, 2012
Messages
86
Reaction score
1
Points
8
Your Mac's Specs
iPhone 4S, MacPro 3.3 GHz 6 Core Intel Xeon /6GB RAM OSX 10.8.2, 27" display,i AirPort Extreme
I'd like to see USB 3.0 - and yes - I do think that's possible - even with Thunderbolt on board.

The only USB 3.0 Mac OS X driver I've seen was put out by LaCie for some of their new products. They claim a 7 second download on a 700MB video file compared to 25 seconds with USB 2.0. That pretty much exhausts my knowledge of USB 3.0. Does anyone know if Apple has expressed any interest in it?
 
Joined
Mar 10, 2012
Messages
86
Reaction score
1
Points
8
Your Mac's Specs
iPhone 4S, MacPro 3.3 GHz 6 Core Intel Xeon /6GB RAM OSX 10.8.2, 27" display,i AirPort Extreme
Optical drive issues

I have a four year old MB with a slot loading optical drive - the fact that it's broken was inevitable.

Well at least it's not a firmware problem. Also it's an easy DIY fix. Did mine in 25 minutes and I'm no techie but I watched a video by one on u-Tube once. ;)
 

vansmith

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
19,924
Reaction score
559
Points
113
Location
Queensland
Your Mac's Specs
Mini (2014, 2018, 2020), MBA (2020), iPad Pro (2018), iPhone 13 Pro Max, Watch (S6)
Well at least it's not a firmware problem. Also it's an easy DIY fix. Did mine in 25 minutes and I'm no techie but I watched a video by one on u-Tube once. ;)
I would but I don't care much anymore. In fact, I rarely used it when it was working. Plus, I'm looking for as many excuses as I can find to get a new machine. ;)
 
Joined
Sep 11, 2010
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Victoria BC Canada
Your Mac's Specs
Mini, 24" Cinema Display
I try to sell these things and a form over function MBP is not going to cut it with customers.:\
 
Joined
Apr 20, 2009
Messages
4,301
Reaction score
124
Points
63
Location
The lonely planet
Your Mac's Specs
Too many...
I don't believe Apple would have a problem upping the screen resolution while maintaining battery performance. They seem to have done that all while adding a 4core graphics processor chip. One thing that I do have a problem with is the "MacBook" part of the name in all of Apple's notebooks. To me, if you have something that further designates a characteristic of a line(Air, and Pro), it should mean that there is a standard option without those features. This is where the regular MacBook makes sense. With it, you can have the MacBook Air, and MacBook Pro. They should have something available that is just simply called Macbook!
 
Joined
Sep 30, 2007
Messages
9,962
Reaction score
1,235
Points
113
Location
The Republic of Neptune
Your Mac's Specs
2019 iMac 27"; 2020 M1 MacBook Air; macOS up-to-date... always.
I don't believe Apple would have a problem upping the screen resolution while maintaining battery performance. They seem to have done that all while adding a 4core graphics processor chip. One thing that I do have a problem with is the "MacBook" part of the name in all of Apple's notebooks. To me, if you have something that further designates a characteristic of a line(Air, and Pro), it should mean that there is a standard option without those features. This is where the regular MacBook makes sense. With it, you can have the MacBook Air, and MacBook Pro. They should have something available that is just simply called Macbook!

Then there should be a desktop model simply called a Mac.
 
Joined
Mar 10, 2012
Messages
86
Reaction score
1
Points
8
Your Mac's Specs
iPhone 4S, MacPro 3.3 GHz 6 Core Intel Xeon /6GB RAM OSX 10.8.2, 27" display,i AirPort Extreme
I try to sell these things and a form over function MBP is not going to cut it with customers.:\

I'd have to disagree on that. Seems to me Apple went with form over function when they eliminated an accessible battery pack.
 
Joined
Apr 9, 2008
Messages
36
Reaction score
0
Points
6
I don't believe Apple would have a problem upping the screen resolution while maintaining battery performance. They seem to have done that all while adding a 4core graphics processor chip.

I do not mean to troll or anything, but it annoys me that everyone thinks that you can just "put in a larger graphics card". There is currently no single video card on the entire planet that can possibly support a resolution higher than the current high end 2560*1600 with an acceptable performance, let alone in a portable form factor. Imagine if one could fit in such a graphics card anyways, the tradeoffs would be a ridiculous cost, immense heat development as well as power consumption. Not to mention the cost of the high resolution panel itself.

This benchmark supports my rant. It shows the worlds most powerful single graphics card being forced to its knees playing Battlefield 3 at 2560*1600 while consuming 200W (excluding all other hardware).

So yeah, high resolution does come at a cost. Do not expect to see one in a notebook with the form factor of today's MPB with the same 7 hour battery life this year.
 
Joined
Apr 20, 2009
Messages
4,301
Reaction score
124
Points
63
Location
The lonely planet
Your Mac's Specs
Too many...
I do not mean to troll or anything, but it annoys me that everyone thinks that you can just "put in a larger graphics card". There is currently no single video card on the entire planet that can possibly support a resolution higher than the current high end 2560*1600 with an acceptable performance, let alone in a portable form factor. Imagine if one could fit in such a graphics card anyways, the tradeoffs would be a ridiculous cost, immense heat development as well as power consumption. Not to mention the cost of the high resolution panel itself.

This benchmark supports my rant. It shows the worlds most powerful single graphics card being forced to its knees playing Battlefield 3 at 2560*1600 while consuming 200W (excluding all other hardware).

So yeah, high resolution does come at a cost. Do not expect to see one in a notebook with the form factor of today's MPB with the same 7 hour battery life this year.

Want to bet on that? You should know better than to bring up results from game play. Game play on any card can bring down performance. And FYI, the iMac's already support that kind of resolution just fine with their 2560x1440. The other thing to note is that one wouldn't need to go up to those resolution levels on a notebook to gain much better screen quality, quality similar to viewing an iPhone/iPad because you are viewing it at greater distances. There's a lot more to computers than gaming. I'm not here to spend thousands on a computer to play a 40 dollar game.
 
Joined
Jan 13, 2007
Messages
4,773
Reaction score
166
Points
63
Location
Central New York
Your Mac's Specs
15in i7 MacBook Pro, 8GB RAM, 120GB SSD, 500GB HD
I'd have to disagree on that. Seems to me Apple went with form over function when they eliminated an accessible battery pack.

Seriously? No. Apple went function plus form with that. The battery pack took up space, so having a permanent battery means that the battery can be much larger, so longer life.
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
13
Reaction score
1
Points
3
Location
California
Your Mac's Specs
MacBook Pro 13.3 2.4Ghz C2D 8GB Corsair X128 128GB SSD, iBook G4 1.2Ghz 1.25GB RAM
Keep the 13 MBP

I'd have to disagree on that. Seems to me Apple went with form over function when they eliminated an accessible battery pack.

I would bet that the 13" MBP is the top seller of all the Apple MB models.

For many uses, the 13" MBA is underpowered. Yes, the 13" Air benchmarks well when you pit the 13" MBA with an SSD against a 13" MBP with an HDD.

Replace that HDD on the MBP with an SSD and the 13.3" MBP blows the Air away in any kind of compute intense task - by about 30-40% or more.

i.e. for early 2011 models, Anandtech reviews :

Example: Cinebench on a 2.7 i5 13" MBP scores 4808, on the 1.7 i5 13" Air it's 3154.

Example: Browser battery life 13" MBP is 544 mins, vs 416 for the 13" MBA

How about no.

Give the 13" MBP the display of the 13" MBA and make some reasonable SSD options for it. If they want to remove the DVD/CD, fine, but leave the higher end compute power.
 
Joined
Feb 25, 2009
Messages
91
Reaction score
4
Points
8
The idea that one can simply add hubs and external drives and such to a diminished-capability MBP defeats the entire purpose of making the MBP thinner and lighter. By the time one adds the hubs for extra ports, an external optical drive, a Thunderbolt-Firewire dongle, etc., the resulting package would probably weigh more than the current MBP, as well as being considerably less convenient than keeping it all in one box as the Pro line does now.

Seems to me the current set up, from iPad to Air to Pro, covers the portable computing needs and desires of the full spectrum, from casual web/mail only users to high end push-the-system-to-its-limits professional who needs full power AND reasonable portability. Changing that to drop support for the high end user would only damage Apple in the long run.
 
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
47
Points
48
Your Mac's Specs
2.8 GHz 15" MacBook Pro OS X 10.7.x & some old Macs
Seems to me the current set up, from iPad to Air to Pro, covers the portable computing needs and desires of the full spectrum, from casual web/mail only users to high end push-the-system-to-its-limits professional who needs full power AND reasonable portability. Changing that to drop support for the high end user would only damage Apple in the long run.
It does seem like Apple is cutting out the high end users. When it comes to computers I think it's a mistake because with the popularity of iPads we'll probably see more casual users using them instead of buying computers or they won't upgrade as often because their current computers will be fast enough for the simple tasks they do. This means that it will be mostly high end users that need the processing power in their laptops who will still upgrade their computers often. Apple might be catering to a group that is starting to diminish in the computer buying market. I definitely only upgrade because I need the speed.
 
Joined
Jan 11, 2012
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Will it still have the same power?

I was reading this and wondering "will it have the same power?"
If it does, apple will then again have a great success in a product
 

Shop Amazon


Shop for your Apple, Mac, iPhone and other computer products on Amazon.
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon and affiliated sites.
Top