MacBook Pro gets processor upgrade, glossy display

If you've been ogling Apple's new MacBooks, and have decided that you'd rather spend a little more and get a Pro model instead, Apple's got you covered. While the lower-end models have hogged the limelight this AM, their brethren haven't been forgotten. Apple has bumped up the processor speeds on the MacBook Pro series, with the base model getting an upgrade from 1.83GHz to 2GHz, and the 2GHz model moving up to 2.16GHz -- not a surprising move, given that you can now get a 2GHz MacBook for $500 less than the cost of a base Pro, and get it in black, to boot. Apple is also making the Pro series available with an optional glossy display, similar to those announced for the MacBook earlier today.

[Thanks to everyone who sent this in.]

[quahogian @ May 16th 2006 10:13AM]

woohoo....i guess

[Conrad Quilty-Harper @ May 16th 2006 10:25AM]

The MacBooks are still extremely good value. The mid range model MacBook has the same CPU but is �400 less than the bottom end MacBook Pro.

[Whiplash @ May 16th 2006 10:27AM]

ARGH! One day after I predicted Apple wouldn't do a black laptop.... they come out with a black laptop. Anyone want my stock picks for tomorrow?

[PodMonkeys @ May 16th 2006 10:30AM]

I was so excited to see the new MacBook, especially with its great 13" widescreen size, and then I saw the vid chip specs... Intel GMA950...

Is it too much to ask for them to make a decently small sized laptop that can play WoW?

[QDuB @ May 16th 2006 10:36AM]

Would someone PLEASE explain to me what the phrase "to boot" means (and maybe some history on it)??? It is used SO much on this site, and i have NO idea what it means. Does it mean "as well"? Someone please help me.

Okay back to the topic. I am torn! I do now know which laptop I want to get! They're all so beautiful! I'll probably end up gettin the MacBook Pro sometime this fall. Or maybe they will have a tablet by then!! I just don't know!!!

[John Hinds @ May 16th 2006 10:37AM]

If you spec up a white 2GHz MacBook to a 80GB HD then the apart from the screen size it has the same spec as a 2GHz Macbook Pro.

But the MacBook costs �460 less. Weird

[Eric @ May 16th 2006 10:41AM]

ordered... rush to order m8s ... these things gone fast.

[Neil @ May 16th 2006 10:42AM]

The GMA950 just kills this notebook for me. The chip is as slow as molasses for anything other than the most basic tasks....I'd hate to run Vista Aero Glass on a GMA950.

I didn't expect them to go with the Radeon X1600 for the MB, but X1300/1400 would have been nice, even if they only had 64mb of dedicated ram. Still the white MB matches up well with the HP DV1000t so I can?t hate on the computer too much.

[Jason @ May 16th 2006 10:44AM]

Damn it. I was hoping for a real grahic option beyond the Intel stuff. It's a great price and I may ahve to get one anyways.

[Whiplash @ May 16th 2006 10:44AM]

#5 - here you go

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+%22to+boot%22

[Morton Salty @ May 16th 2006 10:52AM]

Macbook is still made of plastics, screen size of course, crappy GMA graphic processor, express card slot, better brighter screen...I think I'll still take the macbook pro if I had an extra bit laying around. Do like the new latch mechanism, must see it in person and very very interested in the new keyboard design. I am really disappointed in the graphic chips sets Apple has been using in the lower end products but cost saving. Well, this still is a beautiful machine, and with student pricing and living in a tax free state I can get my hands on it for under $999 very happy.

[peter @ May 16th 2006 10:53AM]

Mac book well amazing what more could we have hoped for? Well the only thing i expected was a far better Graphics option this has just killed this model a lot of people like to play some games on ther laptop and this pathetic chip gma 950 does not push the boat out , take stock Apple you have lost a lot of sales because of this short sightness.

[awa64 @ May 16th 2006 10:58AM]

@6: You're right, it is the same, except for the screen... and the graphics card, RAM, optical drive, light-up keyboard...

[Black Guy @ May 16th 2006 11:03AM]

iThink that the integrated gfx option works fine for the market that these products r intended for. Gaming? iBooks (now MacBooks) have NEVER been good for playing anything but simpler games. U sure as hell r'nt going to get F.E.A.R to run on this thing but maybe u can play Mahjong if thats any consolation.

Regarless though, integrated gfx, especially Intel's, suck serious nutts. iDon't care what market it is intended 4 'cuz iHate them. iAs well was waiting for a MacBook but I'm not getting 1 just cuz it uses an Intel gfx chip(general consesus is that its garbage). S3 makes cheap solutions w/ respectable perfomance that would b perfectly suitable for products like these. Or hell, do what console developers usually do & get a custom design. Anything, but Intel's sorry ass chips.

[Jarod @ May 16th 2006 11:04AM]

Can anyone provide an unbiased review of matte vs glossy screens? The decision seems tough at this point (I think)

[James Somerman @ May 16th 2006 11:05AM]

http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/B/boot.html

[Zac Grose @ May 16th 2006 11:16AM]

"3. ARGH! One day after I predicted Apple wouldn't do a black laptop.... they come out with a black laptop. Anyone want my stock picks for tomorrow?"

What do you definitely *not* recommend in the stocks for tomorrow?


As for the glossy vs matte debate, I'm a matte person myself. The MBP and MB range is bright enough now, and don't have any contrast issues. Glossy would be a seriously killer in the sun.

[bob w @ May 16th 2006 11:18AM]

In regards to the glossy screen.. I have a NEC Opticlear 1970 GX here at work and it is beautiful (glossy screen). I wouldn't want to take it outside however, the glare would be terrible.

[Zac Grose @ May 16th 2006 11:18AM]

Note, don't ask how, but "Glossy would be a seriously killer in the sun." was meant to imply that it'd be bad... just so that's clear.

[retsel @ May 16th 2006 11:23AM]

its the first time being black always cost you more...

[Saxon @ May 16th 2006 11:28AM]

"its the first time being black always cost you more..."

Kindof like with hookers

[yossi @ May 16th 2006 11:30AM]

glossy display-- just like my vaio, which makes it practically useless outdoors, not so excited about this feature

[Joe @ May 16th 2006 11:36AM]

I thought the fanboys were always pointing out that the mac is better because it has a matte screen? They'll flip their rhetoric faster than a...guess they need some new talking points.

[Rob Stevens @ May 16th 2006 11:42AM]

"3. ARGH! One day after I predicted Apple wouldn't do a black laptop.... they come out with a black laptop. Anyone want my stock picks for tomorrow?"

Sure, I'm always up for shorting a stock or two. :)

[Jacob @ May 16th 2006 11:49AM]

It has a GLOSSY screen?

Since when the hell is that a FEATURE?

I want a MATTE screen. Glossy screens give off so much glare it's gross.

(Argh. Two steps forward, one step back...)

[ramos @ May 16th 2006 11:50AM]

come on now
glossy is not for the pros. This is obviously an ibook -- oh, macbook
An amatuer line. No pun intended
audio visual geeks need no reflections

[Zac Grose @ May 16th 2006 11:51AM]

"20. I thought the fanboys were always pointing out that the mac is better because it has a matte screen? They'll flip their rhetoric faster than a...guess they need some new talking points."

...thank you for that wholly unsupported claim.

[JimmyJames @ May 16th 2006 11:52AM]

I'm sorry to see the MacBook sport the glossy screen. I agree that the colors look better, but for anything other than watching movies it's highly annoying and unneccesary. Getting rid of the glare is such a hastle.
I'm glad the MacBook Pro models have it as an option. I hope they never make it standard!
I also hope to see a matte screen option for future MacBooks!

[l.m.orchard @ May 16th 2006 12:02PM]

I'm a Mac fanboy, and I think the glossy screen is a crap decision. I was really looking forward to the MacBooks, and this stops me in my tracks.

[Andrew @ May 16th 2006 12:03PM]

I would pay so much more for a MacBook Pro when it has the same specs. I would pay more just for a matt screen, but no way would I add an "optional" glossy screen.

[DT @ May 16th 2006 12:15PM]

@ Everyone laughing that Apple now has a glossy screen...

IT"S OPTIONAL! If you want it on the MBP, you can have it, at no charge. If you like matte, then go ahead and get matte. If you like shiny things, get the glossy. Woop-de-freaking-do.

[greyscale @ May 16th 2006 12:19PM]

#17, #18.... ??????? If you are going to be racist,, at least be funny

[Numo @ May 16th 2006 12:20PM]

Isnt a glossy screen better in the sun? Im going to buy a MacBook Pro, but i dont know what to choose... i currently have a fujitsu p7010D, wich has a glossy screen, and in the sun it looks really great... it looks strange, but its very readable, and before that, i had a toshiba with a matte screen... and i couldnt use it outdoors... so whats best? im thinking of using my mbp in the sun a lot...

[Jared @ May 16th 2006 12:24PM]

Does any one know what the video card it on this thing.... went to the apple site and it no where to be found. Maybe im blind?

[JCA @ May 16th 2006 12:30PM]

Thank you DT.....no one read the freaking article it seems. Even in the article it says the glossy screen is OPTIONAL.

Fucktards.

[Matt @ May 16th 2006 12:36PM]

The screen on this thing is a real downer. first there's the glossy thing which is useless in my opinion, it makes keeping the screen clean impossible and finding a spot with no glare a supreme challenge. second, the aspect ratio doesn't seem to make sense given its size. A small notebook like this would seem to be ideal for taking to class, but a widescreen isn't set up to take advantage of this since it will only show larger margins on the side of the page.

oh apple, i just wanna love you baby, but you keep pushing me away.

[Jimbolaya @ May 16th 2006 12:53PM]

OPTIONAL glossy y'all.

While we're on options, there should be a split screen glossy/non glossy like bifocals for the screen. Not that I know what the heck a glossy screen is good for. Might be easier to remove kiddie pen markings.

[applefan @ May 16th 2006 12:55PM]

YES GREAT VALUE, BUT DID ANYONE NOTICE THE GRAPHIC CARD ON THE NEW MACBOOKS!!!! 64MEGS RATHER THAN 256MEGS IN THE PROS!!! HUGE DIFFERENCE RIGHT THERE!

[WakkaWakka @ May 16th 2006 1:01PM]

I bought a MacBook Pro 2.0Ghz exactly one week ago. And now they've been speedbumped. Great. Thanks Apple.

[Sean @ May 16th 2006 1:02PM]

Glossy? Bah. Definitely a fashion trend that I thought Apple would avoid. At least it has sound in and monitor spanning this time around. Disappointed in the generic graphics chip tho. Looks like my iBook is going to get upgraded to a MacBoook Pro just as soon as the next hardware revision hits the street.

JCA- Check the Apple store, the glossy screen is definitely not an option on any of the MacBook models (just the MacBook Pro models). If it were an option on the MacBook, I'd take it a lot more seriously.

[Bill I @ May 16th 2006 1:26PM]

To the people saying the glossy screen is optional.

It is ONLY optional on the MacBook Pro. For the MacBook, glossy is the only option you've got. Go build one for yourself...there is nary a matte option.

....come on, guys, that didn't take me longer than 30 seconds to figure out. Before you go spewing BS, make sure what you're spewing is correct at least.

[que @ May 16th 2006 1:35PM]

"JCA- Check the Apple store, the glossy screen is definitely not an option on any of the MacBook models (just the MacBook Pro models). If it were an option on the MacBook, I'd take it a lot more seriously."

Yes but the article is in reference to the Macbook pro not the macbook. That seems to be the problem here everyone is having. I am glad apple is at least giving us the option on the macbook pros, I personally hate glossy screens. I hope this sets a trend in the laptop world because I have certainly never seen the glossy screen as an option on any other laptop before pc or mac. It drives me nuts that you have to deal with the glossy if you want a pc laptop these days.

[m @ May 16th 2006 1:59PM]

James Somerman, that's not the type of boot #5 is talking about. Read his post carefully. Whiplash has it right though. If only we had some background on the term.

[will chen @ May 16th 2006 2:01PM]

It was nary 1 year ago when powerbook updates took half a year.

Thank god steve jobs finally stopped lying to us about the g4 and switched to intel.

[Jeff @ May 16th 2006 2:02PM]

"I have certainly never seen the glossy screen as an option on any other laptop before pc or mac. It drives me nuts that you have to deal with the glossy if you want a pc laptop these days."

Huh?

Almost every PC maker has it as an option, not a required feature. Go to HP's or Dell's site and build a machine - plenty of them come with or without the glossy screen. For example, HP lists their displays for most of their laptops like this:

"Display
15.4" WXGA high-definition widescreen display with BrightView option"

Build it out, and sure enough, you can get the "standard" (i.e. "good") display, or you can get the "BrightView" (i.e. "crap") display for $50 more.

If you're buying a laptop in a STORE, well, that's a different story. But since when have you ever been able to pick hardware in a store? You buy whatever they have. Even still, though, I see plenty of laptops with standard displays. If you want a *particular* laptop with a standard display, though, you may need to just do the BTO thang.

(I bought my laptop in a store and got one of these horrid displays... but I decided I could live with it because the rest of the PC was such a great deal.)

[Brian @ May 16th 2006 2:23PM]

#5 Since everyone is giving you definitions of "to boot" which doesn't answer your original question of the origin of the phrase, a simple google search of "origin of the term to boot" resulted in this informative explanation.

Follow the link and scroll to the very bottom for the article on "to boot"
http://www.word-detective.com/091400.html

[Graeme @ May 16th 2006 2:28PM]

I think this was mentioned somewhere, but Apple is not going to make a 12" version of the MacBook Pro right?

[fowler @ May 16th 2006 3:50PM]

i woke to the price drops with an unhappy face. but that changed when apple refunded me the difference.

[ChillyWilly @ May 16th 2006 3:55PM]

A month after I bought my MacBook Pro, they bump the processor. No biggie... mine works fine, but it would have been nice to get the bump for the same price I paid ($2499, 2.0Ghz)

My friend just bought his 2.0Ghz on Friday. He's going to see what he can do to get his bumped up to the 2.16Ghz.

[Oscar Feliciano @ May 16th 2006 3:56PM]

#36: You always had the option to upgrade to a 2.16GHz CPU in your MacBook Pro. It's been available as a built-to-order option since February.