backtop

Print 26 comment(s) - last by Dreifort.. on Jan 7 at 2:09 PM

A new MacBook Pro, a 17" aluminum unibody design is reportedly coming soon from Apple, possibly to be announced at MacWorld. The new laptop's battery is rumored to be harder to replace, like the MacBook Air.  (Source: 9 to 5 Mac)

Reports indicate the Mac mini will do away with its Intel chipset, shown here, and adopt an NVIDIA chipset, another blow to Intel and Apple's relationship.  (Source: Engadget)
Sources say that products are set to begin shipping, may or may not be introduced at Macworld

With the new year and the month of January comes many of the county's largest technology shows, with the Consumer Electronics Show, the North American International Auto Show, and Macworld to just name a few.  The latter, Macworld, for several years has become Apple's place to air the secret new products it has been brewing up.  And though the tough economy has forced Apple to announce that this year at Macworld will be its last, that has not stopped this year's rumors, such as talk of a possible iPhone nano release, from picking up steam.

The latest rumor, reportedly confirmed by sources at Apple is that the company is preparing for a couple major additions and changes to its desktop and notebook lines.  Apple, which according to market research is third in the nation in computer sales, and about seventh in the world, is looking for ways to extend the gains that have fueled its return as a major player in computer sales.

One of the two allegedly confirmed new products is a 17 inch MacBook Pro.  The notebook sports an aluminum unibody design similar to the MacBook Air and the current 13.3" and 15.4" MacBook Pros.  Furthermore, in what will likely rile many Apple fans, it will not have an easily removable battery panel like the other MacBooks.  Its battery will be hard to replace, similar to the MacBook Air.  The battery is also rumored to be "super thin".  Some are hypothesizing the battery is actually a silver-zinc design, which Apple has long expected to debut.  Longer lasting silver-zinc batteries could take some of the sting out of the difficulty replacing the battery.

The other big rumor, again allegedly confirmed by sources within Apple, is that NVIDIA chipsets will now be powering the Mac mini.  The move would be another blow to Intel's partnership with Apple as the computer had previously featured the 945GM chipset.

The rumor that Apple was switching to NVIDIA first cropped up when resource files for NVIDIA MCP79 chipsets cropped up on the latest MacBook and MacBook Pro builds, which were already switched from the 945GM Intel chipset to the NVIDIA GeForce 9400M version of the MCP79 chipset last October.  Intel, which has been waging a war of words and market share with NVIDIA, has pledged to try everything in its power to win back Apple's business.

The new Mac mini is expected to have ports galore, with the NVIDIA chipset adding a Mini DisplayPort and a Mini DVI port, as well as a FireWire 800 port (it previously had a FireWire 400 port) and a fifth USB port.  Thus users will have a choice of using an Apple display or a third party display, with Apple's LED-backlit Cinema Display utilizing the DisplayPort link, and with third party displays able to connect on the Mini DVI port.

Reportedly, there was some design issues that slowed the release of new 17” MacBook Pro, which was rumored to make its debut in October.  While sources at Apple were said to have confirmed the existence of both the jumbo MacBook Pro and the Mac mini, they stopped short of saying it was coming at Macworld, simply stating that the show would me a logical place to introduce those products.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Curious, Why not AMD?
By just4U on 1/5/2009 10:41:17 AM , Rating: 2
Im curious why they went with Nvidia over AMD. I'd have thought that a 780G type design (or newer) would be a better and more powerful option over Nvidia's current lineup. I mean Apple products tend to come at a premium. Since the prices are comparable you'd think they'd go with the better option.

I could be wrong I haven't read much on the Nvidia front about where they stand currently in regards to notebook stuff but you'd think people would still be a little gun shy after the 8600M.




RE: Curious, Why not AMD?
By just4U on 1/5/2009 10:44:53 AM , Rating: 1
(grin) that might be a bit confusing (after reading it) the 780G is for Amd cpu's. What I was talking about was their graphic solutions. It would seem to me as far as low profile goes .. amd video chips would be the route many oem's would want to go.


RE: Curious, Why not AMD?
By Bateluer on 1/5/2009 10:56:45 AM , Rating: 5
Using the AMD chipsets would require them to use AMD CPUs, something that Apple doesn't want to do. At least, not yet.

The Nvidia chipsets provide far better IGPs than any of Intel's chipsets, which are still a pathetic joke.


RE: Curious, Why not AMD?
By just4U on 1/5/2009 11:13:25 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah... I hadn't had my morning coffee yet and my brain was still asleep. I dunno tho... I mean it would be a lucrative market for Amd to somehow get their Graphic chips on boards with Intel Cpu's. You'd think they'd possibly consider that.. Or is there a conflict of interest by going that route?


RE: Curious, Why not AMD?
By DASQ on 1/5/2009 12:30:57 PM , Rating: 3
Yeah, pathetic joke because you KNOW people buy Mac Mini's as their primary gaming machines.

Seriously. Intel's GMA may suck, but it does exactly what it's meant to do; Run the GUI and a little more. Last I checked, it did exactly that.


RE: Curious, Why not AMD?
By quiksilvr on 1/5/2009 2:46:35 PM , Rating: 2
You fail to realize that Snow Leopard is coming out later on down the line and will most likely be more graphics intensive. And think of how cool it would be to actually play GAMES DECENTLY on the Mac Mini. Crazy thought, huh?


RE: Curious, Why not AMD?
By DASQ on 1/5/2009 4:45:31 PM , Rating: 3
No, I do realize that. OSX has risen in every requirement with every major revision. Leopard struggles when using keynotes on my friends MacBook w/ 2GHz CD processor. He switched back to Tiger anyway (and then bought a MBP 3 months later).

The problem is, you're buying a Mac Mini, the cheapest possible full Apple computer.


RE: Curious, Why not AMD?
By cyriene on 1/5/2009 8:59:52 PM , Rating: 3
So does this mean we will see commercials about how Snow Leopard is too graphic intensive for the older mac computers and we need a super powerful GPU like we did with Vista Aero?? But you can't upgrade so better buy a new mac!

What a joke, my old crappy video card worked with aero just fine


RE: Curious, Why not AMD?
By TheInternal on 1/5/2009 6:26:26 PM , Rating: 3
I know the older mac minis couldn't adequately power 20"+ monitors adequately due to the gimped IGP. I came really close to getting one until I learned how laughable the graphics options were for something at that price point. A Mac mini with a reasonable IGP is appealling to me at this point in life, but I'm broke. :(


RE: Curious, Why not AMD?
By DASQ on 1/5/2009 6:48:37 PM , Rating: 2
That's true, but same goes for the older MacBooks :/

Though I don't know why you'd budget for a 20" monitor and only a Mac Mini to go with it.


RE: Curious, Why not AMD?
By Pneumothorax on 1/5/2009 10:45:55 PM , Rating: 2
"Though I don't know why you'd budget for a 20" monitor and only a Mac Mini to go with it."

Probably the same reason why I went with a mac mini to use with my Dell 24" as apple either forces you to use a all-in-one imac or to spend almost $3000 for the cheapest Mac Pro. Apple needs a mid-range desktop and the mini is the closest to that. (I'm not including OSX86 as their use is controversial.)


RE: Curious, Why not AMD?
By ltcommanderdata on 1/5/2009 11:10:18 AM , Rating: 1
It's kind of funny that when Apple uses poor GPUs or IGPs people claim, but when they get first dibs on a new more powerful IGP, people still complain.

http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=3432&p=...

In any case, there is little point in Apple going with the 780G when the desktop nVidia 9300 (which is probably clocked like the mobile 9400M) actually outperforms the 780G with or without Sideport. It wouldn't surprise me if the 9400M coupled with DDR3 as Apple implements it (some other vendors just use slower DDR2) is the fastest IGP in a notebook.

Besides the 780G can't work with Intel processors anyways. And I don't think AMD even has a license to make chipsets for the latest 45nm mobile processors on a 1066MHz FSB.


RE: Curious, Why not AMD?
By jconan on 1/5/2009 10:35:22 PM , Rating: 2
It's a given why Apple would ditch Intel graphics chipset since their next OSX version uses OpenCL. Intel graphics chipsets don't pass the mustard when it comes to gpgpu processing and Larabee isn't out yet.

Probably Nvidia and Apple worked out a decent deal for Apple to go with Nvidia instead of ATI. Historically Apple has used ATIs in its graphic line up until a few years ago when Nvidia came out with its Geforce cards.


RE: Curious, Why not AMD?
By kilkennycat on 1/6/2009 12:11:22 AM , Rating: 2
The nVidia MCP7A chip-set (9300 or 9400 graphics-core) is a SINGLE-CHIP Graphics + Memory-interface + Southbridge for Intel processors, the very first single-chip motherboard "chip-set" solution for the Intel family. Very low power-consumption except when playing 3D games. Unlike the Intel integrated-graphics solutions, no problem with any games already compatible with its big-brother nV GPUs. Intel cannot even write a driver for their current integrated P45 that consistently performs correctly on Dx10 games, and depending on the flavor-of-the-month driver release it also has crashes and black-screens on WoW under Vista. The 16 stream processors in the MCP7A have no trouble at all with satisfactory frame-rate at high detail on a modest-graphics game such as WoW and without any help from a discrete GPU.

Also, the MCP7A chip-set supports hybrid-SLI, so that if another discrete nVidia GPU is used within the notebook or as an option plug-in, the stream-processing resources of both chips are combined. And as noted in the article HDMI and Display-Port are supported by the chipset. Plus the video decoder in the MCP7A fully supports Blu-ray decode with less than 25% CPU involvement. And just to cap it off the chipset also supports multiple variants of RAID. Not that this is very important in a notebook, but the MCP7A also has another big target market -- the Home Theatre PC.

A brilliant move by nVidia at a time of steeply-rising netbook and notebook sales based in the Intel processors. No wonder Apple has jumped on-board immediately. MCP7A will only support Intel processors through the Penryn series, but Core i7 CPUs with acceptable power-consumption for notebooks are still a very long way out, and the challenge to Intel of writing decent graphics drivers for their own GPU hardware is still unresolved..... after how many years???

Btw, nVidia has demonstrated a prototype system (called the "Ion" platform ) using a combination of the Intel Atom and the MCP7A chipset that has a lot of people in the netbook OEM world very excited indeed.


This should have happened a long time ago
By dcalfine on 1/5/2009 10:28:35 AM , Rating: 2
Apple's been selling the previous-generation 17" MacBook Pro alongside the new generation of 15" and 13" MacBooks. It shouldn't have taken this long. The Mac Mini has was obsolete the moment it was first announced and has been two years behind all of Apple's other computers in the past. No one even buys the Mac Mini. I hope Phil announces something better than just these two tomorrow.




By ltcommanderdata on 1/5/2009 11:01:52 AM , Rating: 2
It's probably unfair to say no one buys the Mac Mini. Ironically, the Mac Mini is actually a hit in corporations. Microsoft's Mac Business Unit for example has an entire server room full of them to run their software test builds on since the small size allows extreme density so they can test many different use cases. In their case parallelism is more important than raw speed so the equivalent volume in dual core Mac Minis is more useful than a large tower with higher clocked dual quad core processors like the Mac Pro.


RE: This should have happened a long time ago
By Smilin on 1/5/2009 12:59:24 PM , Rating: 2
Could you cite an example of popularity in business other than a business that is writing software for the Mac? MS also has racks and racks of about any other machine you can think of too.


By ltcommanderdata on 1/5/2009 1:18:18 PM , Rating: 2
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/08/18/appl...

Apple's right now trying to promote Macs in the hospitality industry since the Apple brand and design is trendy. As part of the Mac ecosystem, iMacs are used in hotel/cruise ship suites, Mac Minis powering kiosks and signage, Mac Pros for even bigger displays, and XServes to tie everything together. I'm not disputing that the current Mac Mini is dated, but it does serve a purpose in the product line.


By robinthakur on 1/6/2009 5:41:37 AM , Rating: 2
We use Mac minis to test all mac stuff in the company (Investment Bank). We purchased 10. They are actually decent little machines, nearly completely silent and perfect for the purpose for which they were intended (i.e. a barebones tiny mac system) They appeal to exactly the demographic which doesn't really exist here on Dailytech and naturally cannot see the point.


By tayhimself on 1/5/2009 11:27:57 AM , Rating: 2
Apple sucks for not updating the mini, but it is unfair to say that it was obsolete when it came out. It certainly was obsolete when the Dell Studio 9 came out although it compared surprisingly well. I'm looking forward to it frankly.


"Longer Lasting" Silver-Zinc is incorrect
By Doormat on 1/5/2009 12:10:24 PM , Rating: 5
I've been all over the net correcting people on this for the past day.

Silver-Zinc has a shorter life measured in battery cycles than a Li-Ion (200-250 vs 300). However, you get 30-50% increase in energy storage per weight (200Wh/kg), and 50% increase in energy storage per volume (600Wh/L).

So the battery will last 6 hours instead of 4, but you'll have to replace it at 200-250 cycles instead of 300 with a Li-Ion.

The batteries are also expensive ($500) however 95% of the battery is recyclable, including the silver. So instead a Li-Ion which is downcycled (Lithium recovered is not the same quality as what went in), the battery can be broken down to its constituent materials, then remanufactured into a new battery. With an enclosed battery, Apple is controlling the replacement process so it can take the battery and recycle it (and probably give you a credit). Expect Apple to push the green angle on this.




By FITCamaro on 1/5/2009 2:19:48 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
and probably give you a credit


That made me laugh.


By dgingeri on 1/5/2009 7:12:17 PM , Rating: 2
This is the case with nearly all battery technology. the larger the storage capacity the shorter the useful lifetime.

What he meant by "longer lasting" is the storage capacity, not the total useful lifetime, so he is technically correct.

Isn't it just like Apple to include a difficult to replace, short lifetime item in their product, just because it is new technology? I remember this with the original iPod Nano and the flash controller, the new iPod Nano and the OLED screen, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera...


By foolsgambit11 on 1/5/2009 8:43:54 PM , Rating: 2
Okay, so, you get 50% more power into the same size battery. Like you said, that would be 6 hours instead of 4. So, over 300 battery cycles on Lithium Ion batteries, you'd get (4*300=) 1200 hours. On the new Ag-Zn batteries, you'd get between (6*200=) 1200 hours and (6*250=) 1500 hours. So you can expect them to last up to 25% longer. All assuming the batteries show similar capacity losses over lifespan when compared to Lithium Ion.


Necessary Article?
By kelmon on 1/5/2009 1:34:59 PM , Rating: 1
I hate to tell people how to run their business, but what is the point of this rumor article given that the full announcement will be made tomorrow, less than 24-hours after this article was posted? I assume that we can expect a full article (or series of) on the subject that will no doubt just repost much of what has been written here.

I'm not against rumor articles, per se, but this one just seems superfluous.




RE: Necessary Article?
By Dreifort on 1/7/2009 2:09:34 PM , Rating: 2
speaking of rumors... rumor has it that Apple is not getting into the netbook market (or is delaying their development). so, outside of the Air, Apple does not seem to have any immediate developlment of small (10" or less) netbooks.


"So, I think the same thing of the music industry. They can't say that they're losing money, you know what I'm saying. They just probably don't have the same surplus that they had." -- Wu-Tang Clan founder RZA











botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki