What exactly is wrong with the current shape?
What is it with this whole forum and its obsession over a so-called redesign that is likely to remove functionality for the sake of looks?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The next MacBook Pro redesign (merged)
- Thread starter nope7308
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
What is it with this whole forum and its obsession over a so-called redesign that is likely to remove functionality for the sake of looks?
I don't think that many desire a redesign. We're just speculating that Apple will do it. For example my second post I think it will be redesigned in 2016 but I'm not interested in a redistribution per say.
Not total apples to apples (dual vs quad, i5 vs i7), but looking at Anandtech's review of Surface Pro 4 and their comparison of Skylake i5 vs Broadwell, it actually looks like a nice CPU bump for a change. I'm definitely looking forward to seeing what a quad-core Skylake can do in 15" MBP.
My only concern with Apple and a redesign will be their relentless pursuit of thinness at the expense of everything else. I know it 's a pipe dream, but I would love to see maybe two versions of 15" MBP next time around - something slightly thicker than current design with bigger battery and better thermals / quieter cooling, and whatever else they want to call Pro.
I commend you for the self-control, I went into Best Buy this weekend just to look, and walked out with the 15" MBP...
We already have apples to apples comparisons for the desktop chips. In many cases it was even less than 10%. http://www.anandtech.com/show/9483/intel-skylake-review-6700k-6600k-ddr4-ddr3-ipc-6th-generation/23
Lots of reasons to wait for skylake computers. Big cpu performance jumps is not one of them.
I doubt this CPU will end up in the new rMBP as it lacks Iris Pro, but it will probably have the same CPU performance. The difference is small. In fact only 3,9% according to Geekbench 3 benchmarks numbers from Notebookcheck.net. Even with 100mhz extra clock speed it doesn't seem to make a difference. The only thing to look forward for at the moment seem to be Thunderbolt 3/USB C and a thinner design. If they keep the dGPU option it will most likely be offered in the same chassis as it is today.
I still think the iGPU and more efficient power management will provide the improvements in this update. Not worth the wait if you already have a retina Macbook with a dGPU in terms of performance.
Last edited:
Hi, if you want to have a better aproach you should compare the i7 6820HK vs the i7 4870HQ which is up to 10% more powerfull at rendering (cinebench R15) maybe it doesn't look that much... but well is a 50 minutes render vs 40 minutes.
Geekbench uses a mixture of different tests which could be affected by ram, hd, etc... it's good for general usage, but isn't a specific cpu power benchmark.
Leave the CPU tech-geek obsession to the folks who keep posting on this thread about Dell.
Skylake will be a great addition to the new MacBook Pro for the following main reasons (as I see it):
- integration of CPU and GPU = lower power = more battery time
- new architecture, new process = lower power = more battery time
Tech-geek obsessions with GHz, FLOPs and gaming benchmarks are largely irrelevant (unless you're in the market for a new Dell, for example). Even then, shouldn't you be in your bedroom with your liquid nitrogen cooling rig?
I'm looking forward to the new design, but it's a killer to have to wait till WWDC. Unfortunately, I cannot see any other suitable launch window for the new MBP. They might even get Intel to pull out all the stops and give us Kaby Lake by then...
Skylake will be a great addition to the new MacBook Pro for the following main reasons (as I see it):
- integration of CPU and GPU = lower power = more battery time
- new architecture, new process = lower power = more battery time
Tech-geek obsessions with GHz, FLOPs and gaming benchmarks are largely irrelevant (unless you're in the market for a new Dell, for example). Even then, shouldn't you be in your bedroom with your liquid nitrogen cooling rig?
I'm looking forward to the new design, but it's a killer to have to wait till WWDC. Unfortunately, I cannot see any other suitable launch window for the new MBP. They might even get Intel to pull out all the stops and give us Kaby Lake by then...
Designers straddle a never-ending tension between function and form. Apple will always come down on the side of form when a tough decision needs to be made. An obsession I wholeheartedly agree with and love. And it's the reason I cannot even consider a machine from any other manufacturer.
The current MacBook Pro does not have any USB 2.0 ports. It has USB 3.0 ports that are backwards compatible.
You are aware that shape and design are not mutually exclusive. Being that the screen and keyboard are both rectangular in shape there is no way for Apple to update the shape to anything other than what it already is. What are you expecting, it to be cylindrical in shape?
Well we're already witnessing form over function with Apple and the new magic keyboard. I dread to think it, but I guess this new keyboard design (with less travel) will also make it's way to the new rMBPs.
Perhaps it's getting a bit stale.
How about round? Then, if they bring out a round Apple Watch, there will be a synergy there.
I don't think Apple can just remove all the ports on a pro lineup. So for me, there are two options really:
- they will make it MBAlike, thicker on one side where ports will go
- small changes (changed keyboard, bigger trackpad, less bezel, color options) or bigger ones (14 and 16 model)
Or they go all in on USB-C and just rename lineups to The Macbook.
- they will make it MBAlike, thicker on one side where ports will go
- small changes (changed keyboard, bigger trackpad, less bezel, color options) or bigger ones (14 and 16 model)
Or they go all in on USB-C and just rename lineups to The Macbook.
I concur. However I do believe some weight can be shaved off along with some thickness. Look at the surface book. A dedicated GPU in a 13 inch chassis which weights less than the rMBP. Also the XPS 13 and 15. All of these options didn't forsake form over functionality, therefore I'm sure Apple can innovate whilst keeping all ports etc.
Both models are from 2015 with 15 inch screens. Macbook Pro starts at 2.01 kg, while Dell XPS starts at 1.78kg. Though the Dell is slimmer in height at it's lowest (11mm), they both end up about the same with 1mm difference at their highest. Apples offering is also 1mm wider and 12mm deeper.
Dell configuration with 4k IGZO IPS touch screen is about 2kg, so practically the same as the rMBP 15.
Source:
http://www.dell.com/us/p/xps-15-9550-laptop/pd?oc=dncwx1630h&model_id=xps-15-9550-laptop
Last edited:
Your image is wrong. Look at this early review. It says the thickest point is 11mm and the weight is 1.72kg. I think your picture is the old Dell XPS.
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/review/2431698/dell-xps-15-2015-hands-on-review
It was wrong, now it is fixed. Also want to add that according to Weber-Fechners law, a weight around 2kg must loose at least 100g for a person to perceive the change in weight. I see Dell has doubled that.
- Status