Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

MacBook Pros Upgraded and Shipped 467

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the still-waiting-for-wow-benchmarks dept.
Moby Cock writes "Apple Insider is reporting that Apple has started shipping the new MacBook Pro with an upgrade to the CPU clock speed. The two models now sport 1.83 GHz and 2.0 GHz Core Duos (up from 1.67 GHz and 1.83 GHz). A 2.16 GHz upgrade is also available. The price point remains the same." Dear Apple: Slashdot needs to review 5 of these indefinitely. Thank you XOXO ;) Seriously, i'm waiting for someone to give good benchmarks on these- especially testing for Warcraft. Now that it has a new Universal Binary I can't wait to see how it holds up against a modern windows machine.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

MacBook Pros Upgraded and Shipped

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Dual boot (Score:3, Informative)

    by rainbowfyre (175300) on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @11:23AM (#14715976)
    Well, if you want to put your money where your mouth is, there is a bounty growing for just that:

      http://winxponmac.com/ [winxponmac.com]

    Of course, nobody really knows if it is possible.

    -Cinnamon
  • by mccalli (323026) on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @11:25AM (#14715994) Homepage
    ppened to the people who preordered a 1.66GHz for the same price as the 1.83 when they hard launched? Did they get the prototype they ordered or the real deal? Note to self: never preorder new tech!

    macrumor.com says [macrumors.com] that they're getting the upgraded model.

    Cheers,
    Ian

  • by good soldier svejk (571730) on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @11:25AM (#14715998)
    My vendor wants $1699 for the base MacBook Pro. Doesn't seem that expensive to me.
  • Re:WoW (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @11:25AM (#14715999)
    I wouldn't hold your breath. Blizzard has already said (can't find the link) basically that you can use Rosetta for all their other OS X games. If you want to install Starcraft or Diablo 2, they tell you to download the OS X installer.

    They've implied that there will be no fat binaries for their existing games other than WOW.

    I'm not too upset, and I play a Warcraft 3 custom map almost daily. I really haven't noticed any speed issues, but it does crash sometimes.
  • Re:MacBook (Score:3, Informative)

    by jandrese (485) <kensama@vt.edu> on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @11:33AM (#14716061) Homepage Journal
    You could just trash Safari and install Firefox (or leave Safari there and install Firefox). It's not like the browser is integrated into the OS or anything.
  • by isa-kuruption (317695) <kuruption@[ ]uption.net ['kur' in gap]> on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @11:42AM (#14716141) Homepage
    I just called Apple and confirmed that all 1.67 orders will be upgraded to 1.83 and all 1.83 orders will be upgraded to 2.0. You should receive an email about the changes with any revised shipping date within the next day or two.

    I had the same question, I had ordered the 1.83ghz and didn't want to get screwed by this little change in plans.

  • Re:MOD PARENT UP! (Score:4, Informative)

    by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @11:48AM (#14716184)

    Why did this get marked troll?? What's he's saying is true .

    Because he intentionally missed the point the previous poster was making. This will allow real-world benchmarking of OS+application with hardware and software that is similar enough to expose the bottlenecks.

    people are just blind to reality when it come to Apple.

    Yes, everyone but you is ignorant and misinformed.

    Show me specs of any Mac OS X machine outperforming the top Windows game.

    For some reason not many people try to benchmark a operating system plus a machine against a game. I think it is because they are not even close to being the same thing.

    It's not jut performance it's low cost customiation option too that Windows leads in.

    Performance varies based upon a given task, hardware, and software. The point is we can soon actually benchmark a given task with the same (or very similar) hardware, thus removing a variable. Honestly no one really knows if "Windows is faster" because until now we have not had a way to test it. Of course everyone with the ability to reason knows the result will be that Windows is better at some things and OS X is better at some things.

    In my opinion, Apple's snobbish attitude to third parties and refusal to open up their BIOS has led to these problems.

    Yeah, Apple really should open up OpenFirmware which is what they've been using instead of BIOS for the last decade. They are just now moving to EFI, which is another open standard. You obviously have no idea what you are talking about.

  • Re:Universal games (Score:3, Informative)

    by sethadam1 (530629) <adam@nOsPam.firsttube.com> on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @11:56AM (#14716269) Homepage
    No. You misunderstand the term "universal."

    An app is "universal" when it runs on OS X for PowerPC *and* OS X for Intel. It does not mean it runs on other OSes, and incidentally, they do not.
  • Re:Universal games (Score:3, Informative)

    by _Pablo (126574) on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @11:59AM (#14716298)
    I understand your confusions as the word universal does suggest something more than the reality, whic is that Universal Binaries are universal to the Power PC and x86 versions (possibly 68K) of OS X. So it had no impact whatsoever on Windows apps.
  • Quake 3 (Score:3, Informative)

    by Midnight Thunder (17205) on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @12:07PM (#14716349) Homepage Journal
    Quake 3 has also been release [insidemacgames.com] as a universal binary.
  • MagSafe Power Cord (Score:5, Informative)

    by Kadin2048 (468275) <slashdot.kadinNO@SPAMxoxy.net> on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @12:08PM (#14716359) Homepage Journal
    For everyone else who didn't have a clue what the parent was talking about, here's the deal on the MagSafe Power Cord:

    from http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/design.html [apple.com]
    The new power adapter with MagSafe connector is just that: a magnetic connection instead of a physical one. So, tripping over a power cord won't send MacBook Pro flying off a table or desk; the cord simply breaks cleanly away, without damage to either the cord or the system. As an added nicety, this means less wear on the connectors.
    Pretty slick.

    Apparently [com.com], it's been used on countertop deep fryers for a while now (after some really horrible incidents where people pulled or tripped over cords and got hot oil spilled on them).
  • by BurntNickel (841511) on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @12:11PM (#14716389)

    As a long-time Mac user (with Macs at work) I am more interested in learning what doesn't work on the new Intel Macs than what does.

    Here [macintouch.com] is the compatibility report from MacInTouch. They have complied a quite a bit of reader feedback. There is also a report on Rosetta compatibility [macintouch.com].

  • by daveschroeder (516195) * on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @12:11PM (#14716390)
    Um, they weren't "prototypes", and never were. Yes, the MacBook Pros shown at Macworld were preproduction models (a far cry from something that could be called a "prototype"), and probably didn't have all their agency approvals, but is it any surprise that they were preproduction models since they weren't shipping yet, and Apple clearly stated that when they were announced?

    Everyone who ordered a MacBook Pro simply gets the upgraded models that are actually the ones that will be shipping. Apple obviously knew it was going to be kicking the processor speed up for a while now, and just announced it today. The 1.67 changed to 1.83; the 1.83 changed to a 2.0; and there is a new option for a 2.16.
  • why bundling is bad (Score:5, Informative)

    by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @12:19PM (#14716471)

    Just because the browser comes pre-installed doesn't mean that it's bundled quite the way IE is. You can still remove it, and install any other browser you want.

    Ignoring, for the moment, the architecture behind Safari I think that people get too hung up on "what" and forget the "why." There are two big problems with IE+Windows. One is that it mingles code for file browsing, web browsing, and vital parts of the OS. Basically, it mixes code very insecurely in ways that allow interaction with the internet to potentially cause serious changes to the core of the OS. It also allows local users to abuse the Web browser and gain access to escalated privileges. Basically, it is an insecure and basically unfixable architectural mistake.

    The second issue is not technical. As a monopoly it is illegal for MS to leverage their OS monopoly to gain a Web browser monopoly. The most common way to do this is bundling both products together, which MS did. MS supplies multiple components of an overall computer: OS, applications, mice, etc. Because they have a monopoly on one, they cannot legally bundle the others with that one. They can bundle their mouse with every copy of Office sold, but they cannot bundle Office or the mouse with their OS.

    It is important to note that this does not mean an end user can't buy a bundle that includes Windows and a computer and IE. Retailers are free to bundle anything they want, so long as they don't have monopolies. Dell can bundle all of MS's products and only sell that combination and there is no legal issue. Only MS is legally bound not to do so. They have to sell them separately to Dell so that Dell can choose the best browser to sell to their customers, even though the market forces them to sell Windows as the OS on those computers.

    Apple does not have a monopoly on desktop OS's or Web browsers so they can bundle the two. If they gained a monopoly on either, they could not. The same goes for IBM, and pretty much any Linux distributor.

    To summarize, the problems are the insecurity of an architecture that commingles the core of the OS with a Web browser and illegal business practices. I haven't seen either problem with any alternative OS's.

  • by chamblah (774997) on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @12:25PM (#14716521) Homepage
    I actually just called the apple order status line to check on what would happen to existing orders since I have one that will be shipping soon.

    They have a recorded message, if you chose Macbook orders, that says that all orders placed through Feb 13 have been upgraded to the new CPU's; 1.6 is now a 1.8 and the 1.8 is now a 2.0.

    So good news all around.

    1-800-676-2775, option 1 for english, then option 2, and lastly option 1 for the message.

  • Re:Price Drops? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Fahrvergnuugen (700293) on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @12:26PM (#14716532) Homepage
    Apple hardly ever, as in never, moves their prices around. They have a preset price tier and they slide upgraded products into the price points instead of lowering prices on the existing products. The only case where this wasn't necessarily true was with the PowerBook. The price of the 17" dropped around 500 dollars over the course of a year because of their inability to update the processor. It was stuck at 1.5GHz for over a year.
  • Re:30" display (Score:2, Informative)

    by SpacePirate20X6 (935718) <thebroadbandbuccaneer.gmail@com> on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @12:40PM (#14716654)
    The iMac has a mini-DVI port, yet the MBPro has a full-sized, Dual Link DVI port.
  • Re:WoW performance (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @12:42PM (#14716679)
    Doublecheck that you've maxed out the max camera distance in the interface options menu. By default it starts out at half.
  • Re:30" display (Score:3, Informative)

    by n8_f (85799) on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @01:02PM (#14716869) Homepage
    You might want to check your facts [apple.com] before you post. The iMac comes with a DVI port and the ability to span across a second monitor. Supporting resolutions beyond 1920x1200 is a limitation that they use as a differentiator between the consumer and pro machines, but that is hardly unreasonable, especially considering that to go beyond that you would want dual-link DVI and I would guess that that is marginally more expensive that standard DVI.
  • by MidKnight (19766) on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @01:13PM (#14716969)

    Its just so hard to justify $600+ MacTax for 1lb of less weight and a few minor extras.... Case in point CompUSA is selling an Acer duo... for 1299.

    Some of the hardware differences:

    • Faster processor (1.83GHz versus 1.66GHz)
    • Better video card (ATI X1600 versus ATI X1400)
    • Faster memory (667MHz vs 533MHz)
    • Smaller form factor (1" x 14.1" x 9.6" versus 1.4" x 14.3" x 10.8")
    • Lighter (5.6 lbs versus 6.6 lbs)

    To be fair, bumping up the 1.8GHz Mac to 2GB Ram & the 120GB drive puts the cost at $2699. At that point you may as well add another $200 and get the 2.0GHz chip too. But is having a laptop with the above hardware improvements that runs OS X worth twice as much cash? That's a personal decision, but I bet lots of folks will vote with their wallets on this one.

    In my mind notebooks are the only sector of the personal computer market where you really do get what you pay for. Regardless of the brand, use a $3000 notebook for a month then try to go back to a $1500 one. You won't be pleased.

    --Mid

    Compare for yourself:
    MacBook Pro Specs [apple.com]
    Acer Aspire 5670 Specs [acer.com]

  • Re:MacBook (Score:5, Informative)

    by larkost (79011) on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @02:44PM (#14717735)
    Just to be pedantic: The WebCore/WebKit frameworks are sort-of tied into the OS. If you replace/trash Safari.app, you have not touched the parts that actually do the job of rendering web content. You also can't just replace the version of Safari that shipped with your computer (speaking in general terms... there are means to use the latest versions, but these often have the requirement of the latest OS anyways). In these regards Safari/MacOS X is similar to IE.

    However, Finder.app does not use Safari, and dependancies are few and far between (Help.app would be one), so this is a much more limited thing than IE.
  • by kormoc (122955) <{moc.liamg} {ta} {comrok}> on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @03:43PM (#14718472) Homepage
    sure, osx can't do DX, but the hardware can. My ati and nvidia cards can't do DX under linux, but they can under windows.

    There is no eveidence that the apple hardware redeigned the entire gpu to remove the DX stuff out.
  • by sineltor (312152) on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @04:52PM (#14719091) Journal
    I ordered my macbook pro last night; and this morning got a pleasant email:

    Dear Apple Store Customer,

    Today we announced that this week Apple will begin shipping the new
    15.4-inch MacBook Pro featuring the Intel Core Duo processor, a built-in
    iSight, Front Row with Apple Remote and more. The reception of the
    MacBook Pro has been tremendous and we are working hard to ship as many
    units as fast as possible. Better still, prior to shipment we've
    improved the entire MacBook Pro family with configurations starting at
    1.83Ghz up to 2.16GHz.

    We have automatically upgraded your MacBook Pro from a 1.83Ghz
    processor to a 2.0Ghz processor at no additional cost! Our systems
    will reflect the change to your order by February 15. Please visit
    http://www.apple.com/au/support/store/orderstatus. html [apple.com] for the most
    up-to-date shipping information on your upgraded order.

    To learn more about the most recent upgrades to the MacBook Pro family,
    please visit http://www.apple.com/macbookpro [apple.com]. You might be interested
    to know that Apple is offering an even faster processor the 2.16GHz as
    custom configured option at an additional cost.
  • Re:Still Rev 0. (Score:5, Informative)

    by @madeus (24818) <slashdot_24818@mac.com> on Tuesday February 14, 2006 @05:24PM (#14719376)
    Actually, if you knew the majority of hardware problems with the initial G4 PowerBook were all related to the case (which had problems with it's hinges - which got stiff and cracked, the plastic border round the side which split apart due to stress from the hindges and weak points such as the audio port, the cable for the LCD panel which got streched leading to the displays breaking down, the rubber feet were always coming off and this lead to overheating and stability problems - and this is just a partial list), you'd understand why it's significant, and why the OP has an valid point.

    Sticking with with almost an identical form factor is still significant.
  • Re:Hum (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Freak (16973) <prius DOT driver AT mac DOT com> on Wednesday February 15, 2006 @12:29AM (#14722162) Journal

    Wow. That's the biggest bit of flamebait I've seen in a long time... Let's break it down, point by point.


    Because your modern Windows machine will traditionally have a more powerful AMD processor.

    While AMD is indeed outselling Intel in the 'retail desktop' market, there is nothing 'traditional' about this, it's a recent turn of events. And by most counts, the Pentium-M and Core Duo are at least a match for the latest AMDs. Yes, the Pentium 4/Pentium D suck. That's why Intel is abandoning that core.


    AMD's solutions, even the mobile ones, outperform Intel consistently at low prices.

    Ah, AMD fanboy speak. I'm sorry, but Core Duo simply spanks any available AMD mobile solution. Check out some [notebookreview.com] reviews [trustedreviews.com] (Core Duo 2 GHz, ATI X1400 scores 2092 3DMark05's, and... Oh, wait, I can't find any reviews of a dual-core mobile AMD with current-generation graphics... Sorry. The best I could find was 1203 3DMark05's for a 1.6 GHz Turion with AMD X700 graphics. I looked for over half an hour. Only one review of an AMD-equipped laptop without integrated graphics. And AMD doesn't offer dual-core mobile at any price.


    It'll possibly have more RAM, better integrated graphics, and so on.

    possibly? You can choose the amount of RAM you want... Better integrated graphics? Look again. Apple has X1600 at 128 or 256 MB of VRAM. I only found one non-chipset graphics on an AMD notebook, and it was 64 MB X700. Although I did find an Alienware with a desktop processor and video chip for significantly more than a MacBook Pro (when configured with the slowest dual-core processor, and all other specs equal to the MacBook.)


    Moreso - it will be customisable and easy to optimise the hardware for gaming purposes.

    Yes, and most of the customizations are necessary to bring it to the minimum level of the MacBook; and my 2.0 GHz Core Duo and 256 MB ATI X1600 will be just horrible for gaming. I mean, for crying out loud, the Alienware $2500 portable gaming monster only comes with 256 MB of system memory by default!


    ... it's still a Mac and they paid way more money for less computing power than the regular Windows...

    If it's the same hardware, then it's the same computing power. You can install Linux on a Mac just as a Windows machine. And, again, configure the same between a PC company and a MacBook Pro, and you'll find that you're not paying 'way more' money. Maybe a little more, but as I like 'thin and light', it's worth it to me. (And, as I mentioned, if you configure an Alienware the same, it ends up significantly more expensive.) Nobody ever said Apple was a 'cheap' supplier. They're at the same level as Alienware, or Dell's XPS series. Or compare to a ThinkPad or a Sony. Those are the same 'level' of computer as a Mac. Don't compare to a Compaq or a generic.

It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster. - Voltaire

Working...