New MacBook Pros are Cheaper, Faster, Pro-er
Now they all have a flash memory card slot and non-removable seven-hour battery.
Today is Apple’s big day with its Worldwide Developer Conference and it’s newness for the entire unibody MacBook line.
It seems that Apple has taken Microsoft’s Laptop Hunters message to heart and has cut prices for all of its unibody MacBooks across the board.
The 15-inch MacBook Pro now starts at $1699 as opposed to the $1999 it was previously. The entry-level model has a 2.53 GHz Core 2 Duo with 4 GB of DDR3.
The 17-inch now starts at $2499, down from $2799, with a 2.8 GHz Core 2 Duo and 4 GB of DDR3.
The top model MacBook Air gets a massive price cut of $700 down to $1,799. It comes with a 2.13 GHz Core 2 Duo, 2 GB of DDR3 and a 128 GB SSD.
Curiously, Apple has decided to include the 13-inch MacBook now as part of its MacBook Pro line, as it’s sharing so many of the same characteristics. The 13-inch MacBook Pro now starts at $1199 and comes standard with a backlit keyboard, Firewire 800 and a 2.26 GHz Core 2 Duo and 2 GB of DDR3. This will place the entry-level 13-inch MacBook Pro now ahead of the recently refreshed polycarbonate white MacBook.
All of the unibody MacBooks inherit the ‘built-in’ battery design that was introduced earlier this year in the 17-inch model. Apple boasts that the new design lasts three-times longer than removable batteries with its 1,000 recharges. Battery life also jumps by two hours for a total of seven hours across the board.
While PC notebook and even netbook users have enjoyed this feature for years, the new MacBook Pros will finally get a flash memory card slot. The 13- and 15-inch MacBook Pros will get an SD card slot while the 17-inch will get an ExpressCard slot.
So in summary:
- All unibody MacBooks are now Pros, including the 13-inch model (except the Air)
- All MacBook Pros have flash card readers
- All MacBook Pros have the built-in seven-hour battery
Also, Apple really needs to do something about that glossy glass screen. Hopefully the 17-inch’s option of a matte display will also trickle down, even though Apple didn’t make any mention regarding the screen.
While MacBook Pros are more affordable and attractive than ever, it’s still a premium product that won’t shake the image that Macs are expensive.
- Pirate Party Bags Seats on European Parliament
- Intel Atom-powered Cell Phones by 2011?
- Intel's 'Larrabee' to Be "Huge"
- More Pics of SilverStone's Kickass Raven Case
- What Your RAM Goes Through: the Die-hard Tester
- Modular Power Supplies Less Efficient Say Makers
- AMD Blocks Unlock; Gigabyte Fights Back
- QOTD: What Do You Think of Our Weekend Comedy?
- • Crickets Chirping at Bing Launch
- Apple Says Safari 4 is World's Fastest Browser
- Fusion-io Unviels PCI-e SSD for Gamers
- 5 Reasons Why New Macs and iPhone are Lacking
- Microsoft Not Cool With Hybrid Storage Netbooks
- Acer to Launch Ultra-Thin Timeline Series in June
- Nvidia: GPU Failures Not Affecting Our Orders
- AMD: We're Launching an Atom Killer in 2010
- Windows on 98 Percent of New Netbooks
- 12 Booth Babe Pics We Never Posted
sucks for my friend who just bought a 13 inch unibody for $1299.
Pricing is getting there I guess, and if you do a direct dollar to sterling conversion the 13-inch Pro isn't that badly priced now.
Of course, the actual sterling figure will still be too high, but I might go and do some comparisons anyway.
I hate to say it, but as a boutique system, the base 17" MacBook Pro is actually reasonably priced for a change - matching the processor and screen on an Alienware M17X took it over 2 grand (although it does have a 1GB GTX260M in it) and matching the 13" Pro 2.26GHz as best as possible to a Studio XPS 13 works out only £50-£70 more expensive (and I'd happily pay that for the aluminium unibody).
I know I'm using Dell as a comparison here, but a quick glance over similar Sony Vaios don't return much differences in price either.
Scary to think that Apple have actually made a step in the right direction with their pricing.
Oh nooooo... Now that pricing is going down, PC fanboys will struggle to hate Apple as much as before. All of a sudden, the "cool" look will become a "OK" feature... Fear will grow in their heart that Mac OS X could threaten their beloved heap of bugs from Redmond... I love my antivirus, no, I don't want your working Time machine, I want to pay extra for my 3d tool bar (I don't care if linux geeks also get it for free for years), I want to pay big bucks for the new windows XXX (put version here) that will solve, microsoft ads say (and I always believe them), all the small glitches of my current windows YYY (put version-1 here)...
boooo, what are you blabbering on about?
OMG for once I'm agreeing with LePhuronn
The prices are much better now, and whilst the Alienware PC you mentioned above is better IMO, if I wanted an OSX machine then price is much less of a barrier than it was before (paying ~£100 extra for a unique feature like that isn't unreasonable, paying ~£500 as it was before certainly was unreasonable).
Two problems though, as was highlighted in one of the other features, why are things which should have been standard five years ago being trumpted as major additions now?
Secondly, why do these have fixed batteries? Surely this means a massive repair charge if the battery fails?
@ukctstrider:
Am I really that bad? I'd agree that the M17x is better than the 17" Pro because of that 1GB GTX 260M, but I was going for as like-for-like as I could manage.
The built-in battery is a money-making scheme, nothing more. We saw it with the 1st Gen iPhone - the phone's aren't up to scratch regarding durability but in order to have them replaced you have to shell out a fortune. In about a year's time if the battery proves to be shit I can see lawsuits...
Hehe, you are a bit of a Mac fanboy
You're 100% right about Apple being a boutique system builder though and I hadn't really thought of it that way before. I guess it's because their USP is the OS and the design and not the hardware that it hadn't really occured to me before.
Battery issues are why I don't buy Nokia anymore and why I bought a Sony mp3 player instead of an iPod (although I'll confess to being a Sony fanboy).
I understand that Apple have to use older hardware to fully test it and make OSX more solid, but fleecing users over things like upgrades and batteries is terrible business practice.
@ukctstrider:
lmao@mac fanboy
Nothing could be further from the truth, I'm just not a Mac hater (which on Tom's can usually dump you into the same category). I do like Macs from an aesthetic standpoint, but I'm geek first and designer close second so I know the importance of what's inside the pretty shell.
Up until about a year ago my ideal set up at home would've been a MacPro with a Lnux server for work and a SLI-based PC for play (the consoles downstairs don't count) - I always said that you can't beat a PC for gaming but my job was slightly easier on a Mac simply because I can build hybrid ROMs and do cross-platform testing easier on OSX.
That changed when CUDA really went mainstream and the release of Adobe CS4 nailed it - yes, CS4 is GPU accelerated on both platforms but the PC has better GPUs available, certainly with GeForce in SLI and the Quadro CX. That now makes CS4 on Windows, and by extension the PC as a whole, much more powerful for media creation than the Mac.
FCP can suck my balls frankly.
So now the ideal set up is PCs for both gaming and work and a 13" MacBook for cross-platform testing, Mac fixes and mobile working. Hell I don't even need that if I go Hackintosh.
I'll let you off then
I really don't want to be a Mac hater, I really respect a lot of what they are trying to do, and quite a few of my friends whos opinions I really respect like Macs for certain tasks. I guess I've never really had any positive interactions with a Mac and that distorts my view.
A lot of the Mac issues I think also come from the Mac userbase - it's either misguided ignorance, posing or snobbery.
A lot of the media production students and graduates we bring in for work placements all come from working with Final Cut Pro on the Mac and they bawk when they see us use Premiere CS4 on the PC because it's been drummed into them that "professionals use Macs" and that's something that's always been perpetuated by the industry.
Professional video editors use Avid or Final Cut Pro on the Mac. End of.
But it's total bullshit with nothing other than snobbery and elitism backing it up, especially as Macs are quite simply underpowered for reasons we all know and discuss here. But of course if top people and creatives all say "Macs are best" then Joe Average will never question.
And thus are problem is formed.