Yeah, upgrading to the most current Penryn chips is only "looking" like they're keeping up with technology. If this were a PC laptop you'd be slobbering all over it while extolling its many virtues, one of which no doubt would be how well it keeps up with technology by upgrading to the latest Penryn processors. Right?
1. $19 for the remote is totally lame after dropping $2,000-3000 on what PC Mag calls 'the [best] laptop in the world'. LAME. 2. Since when does the MBP 17" have to get upgrades? $250 for the 2.6 GHz processor!!! It has always come with the fastest available chip. LAME. 3. 15" MBP 2.4 GHz vs 2.6 GHz = $2,050 vs $2,750 (a difference of $700 for what? 256 MB extra video ram and .2 GHz) LAME.
In summary, the 2.5 Should not even be there. the upgrade should be from 2.4 to 2.6. Who is going to pay $500 for .1 GHz increase? Also, whoever decided to lose the remote should be fired (granted many people probably don't use them at all). At the very least there should be a $20 price DROP given they took the remote out of the former package. MultiTouch is cool, but I still feel bummed. Where is the love Apple? $18,000,000,000.00 in the bank and you can't throw in a remote that costs you $1.00 to make?
you know, i'm not sure the remote thing is as big a deal as everyone else seems to think.
out of the few dozen people i know with MB/MBPs, only a single person ever uses his remote, and only when he has his MB hooked up to his TV. (and he's the kind of person Apple wants to sell an AppleTV to...)
it just doesn't seem like it'll actually effect many people, but i'm sure the internet echo chamber will make those 5 really pissed off people sound like hundreds of upset buyers. :\
The processor changes are price for price over the Santa Rosa models. Should Apple just throw in a processor that Intel is selling for hundreds more for no price increase because your limited knowledge of performance is based on the GHz? You didn't even notice that the 2.4 and 2.5GHz options also come with 3MB L2 Cache while the Santa Rosa models had 4MB. Of course, you probably have no idea how that functions anyway so why mention it.
The fact is, these are the chips that Intel has created and priced to replaced the previous models that Apple has replaced, right down to the penny. I am waiting until the performance reviews come out before making a decsion, but I'll probably wait until Nehelam, which should require a new case design and will have a more revolutionary chip design. Also, despite Penryn having SSE4 it will be awhile before apps utilizing SSE4 will be in effect.
QUOTE: "dochebag" REPLY: How old are you? The proper spelling is Douche Bag or Douchebag.
QUOTE (Bender): "Should Apple just throw in a processor that Intel is selling for hundreds more for no price increase?" "The fact is, these are the chips that Intel has created and priced to replaced the previous models that Apple has replaced, right down to the penny." REPLY (antimatter): 1. Well here is the deal Bender, in case you hadn't noticed computer prices (at least w/macs) pretty much have stayed the same for the last few years while the speed of processors has increased, the amount of standard RAM has increased, hard-drive capacity has increased, etc. It is in fact the expectation of the computer buying public that updated models cost the same (or less even) as the outgoing lesser performing models. 2. For instance, the 17" Powerbook I am typing this on cost $2700 four years ago when I bought it in grad school and still today the 17" Macbook Pro starts at $2700. Yet, my laptop has a meager 1.5 GHz single processor, teeny-tiny 80 GB hard drive and came standard with 512MB of RAM, etc. 3. Additionally, in no time in the last four years has there been any OPTION to upgrade the processor on the 17" PB/MBP. It has been a de facto standard for years that the 17" was fully decked out. My question is why? Why is Apple nickel-and-diming people who drop nearly 3K on professional equipment? It seems out of character and it is a CLEAR departure from their previous convention, that is all I am saying.
Sincerely, A Very Unsatisfied* MacHead (*though in general very satisfied and happy w/regards to this particular macbook pro update)
MacHead: Someone who has been using Macs since 1987 or earlier and thinks 'apple fanboys' are greenhorns.
What is everyone talking about? Sure their not as fast as others but I loved that they dropped $200 off the macbook that I was to buy for $1401. I'm going to go off and buy it now, cya...
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
The updates where pretty pathetic, but I suppose they have to *look* like there keeping up with technology...
still a p*ss take that they dont bundle the remote =/
Yeah, upgrading to the most current Penryn chips is only "looking" like they're keeping up with technology. If this were a PC laptop you'd be slobbering all over it while extolling its many virtues, one of which no doubt would be how well it keeps up with technology by upgrading to the latest Penryn processors. Right?
1. $19 for the remote is totally lame after dropping $2,000-3000 on what PC Mag calls 'the [best] laptop in the world'. LAME.
2. Since when does the MBP 17" have to get upgrades? $250 for the 2.6 GHz processor!!! It has always come with the fastest available chip. LAME.
3. 15" MBP 2.4 GHz vs 2.6 GHz = $2,050 vs $2,750 (a difference of $700 for what? 256 MB extra video ram and .2 GHz) LAME.
In summary, the 2.5 Should not even be there. the upgrade should be from 2.4 to 2.6. Who is going to pay $500 for .1 GHz increase? Also, whoever decided to lose the remote should be fired (granted many people probably don't use them at all). At the very least there should be a $20 price DROP given they took the remote out of the former package. MultiTouch is cool, but I still feel bummed. Where is the love Apple? $18,000,000,000.00 in the bank and you can't throw in a remote that costs you $1.00 to make?
Sincerely,
A Very Unsatisfied MacHead
you know, i'm not sure the remote thing is as big a deal as everyone else seems to think.
out of the few dozen people i know with MB/MBPs, only a single person ever uses his remote, and only when he has his MB hooked up to his TV. (and he's the kind of person Apple wants to sell an AppleTV to...)
it just doesn't seem like it'll actually effect many people, but i'm sure the internet echo chamber will make those 5 really pissed off people sound like hundreds of upset buyers. :\
@ antimatter, "A very unsatisfied dochebag",
The processor changes are price for price over the Santa Rosa models. Should Apple just throw in a processor that Intel is selling for hundreds more for no price increase because your limited knowledge of performance is based on the GHz? You didn't even notice that the 2.4 and 2.5GHz options also come with 3MB L2 Cache while the Santa Rosa models had 4MB. Of course, you probably have no idea how that functions anyway so why mention it.
The fact is, these are the chips that Intel has created and priced to replaced the previous models that Apple has replaced, right down to the penny. I am waiting until the performance reviews come out before making a decsion, but I'll probably wait until Nehelam, which should require a new case design and will have a more revolutionary chip design. Also, despite Penryn having SSE4 it will be awhile before apps utilizing SSE4 will be in effect.
Agreed, I just bought a Macbook a couple months ago after the Leopard/Graphics update... I ain't crying over this little boost.
@Jeff
Oh, so Apple is trying to save me from myself? Well that's sweet of them.
@ BENDER
QUOTE:
"dochebag"
REPLY:
How old are you? The proper spelling is Douche Bag or Douchebag.
QUOTE (Bender):
"Should Apple just throw in a processor that Intel is selling for hundreds more for no price increase?"
"The fact is, these are the chips that Intel has created and priced to replaced the previous models that Apple has replaced, right down to the penny."
REPLY (antimatter):
1. Well here is the deal Bender, in case you hadn't noticed computer prices (at least w/macs) pretty much have stayed the same for the last few years while the speed of processors has increased, the amount of standard RAM has increased, hard-drive capacity has increased, etc. It is in fact the expectation of the computer buying public that updated models cost the same (or less even) as the outgoing lesser performing models.
2. For instance, the 17" Powerbook I am typing this on cost $2700 four years ago when I bought it in grad school and still today the 17" Macbook Pro starts at $2700. Yet, my laptop has a meager 1.5 GHz single processor, teeny-tiny 80 GB hard drive and came standard with 512MB of RAM, etc.
3. Additionally, in no time in the last four years has there been any OPTION to upgrade the processor on the 17" PB/MBP. It has been a de facto standard for years that the 17" was fully decked out. My question is why? Why is Apple nickel-and-diming people who drop nearly 3K on professional equipment? It seems out of character and it is a CLEAR departure from their previous convention, that is all I am saying.
Sincerely,
A Very Unsatisfied* MacHead (*though in general very satisfied and happy w/regards to this particular macbook pro update)
MacHead: Someone who has been using Macs since 1987 or earlier and thinks 'apple fanboys' are greenhorns.
What is everyone talking about? Sure their not as fast as others but I loved that they dropped $200 off the macbook that I was to buy for $1401. I'm going to go off and buy it now, cya...