Would you consider another laptop if you dont see C2D MBP/MB soon?

[BBGun]

...Whether Core 2 Duo is slow or not is not relevant, I don't need Apple to tell me that Core 2 is not big enough an improvement over Core and that I don't need it...

Geez dude, you're a real buzzkill!

And you seem to be a bit schizophrenic. Please allow me to quote you from another thread where you stated the following:
"...and heck, even a small bump to a C2D chip would result in a 10% performance increase... hardly insignificant!"

Make up your mind!

 

[tb2007]

Whether Core 2 Duo is slow or not is not relevant, I don't need Apple to tell me that Core 2 is not big enough an improvement over Core and that I don't need it. I want it for future proofing when Windows Vista/Leopard ships, Apple's own agenda is irrelevant to me.

I agree compleletly with that. Apple should be able to put a chip in without having to take months longer than others.

 

[generik]

Geez dude, you're a real buzzkill!

And you seem to be a bit schizophrenic. Please allow me to quote you from another thread where you stated the following:
"...and heck, even a small bump to a C2D chip would result in a 10% performance increase... hardly insignificant!"

Make up your mind!

Read again!

hardly insignificant = significant!

 

[Rodstermac]

I really don't think Merom is going to be so revolutionary to force most Mac users to switch.

I mean, people bought G4 PowerBooks for YEARS...

Well, according to Intel the Core 2 Duo is a MAJOR improvement in every way to the previous chip and benefits laptops the most. They even state that we should see operating times on smaller laptops in the 5 hour range. and 50% more speed. Supposedly they shipped them much earlier than expected to manufacturers and Dell and others have already responded by taking the chipmakers advice and installed them in their entry-level laptops first.

 

[BBGun]

hardly insignificant = significant!

Um... I think you misread my post, because your "theorem" above supports my point!

In this thread you seem to suggest that C2D is insignificant ("not big enough an improvement over Core"), while in the other thread you seem to rave about it, stating that its performance increase over Core is, as you put it above, "significant!"
What else should I be reading? I suppose it's possible you changed your mind.

 

[dbxz]

Well, according to Intel the Core 2 Duo is a MAJOR improvement in every way to the previous chip and benefits laptops the most. They even state that we should see operating times on smaller laptops in the 5 hour range. and 50% more speed. Supposedly they shipped them much earlier than expected to manufacturers and Dell and others have already responded by taking the chipmakers advice and installed them in their entry-level laptops first.

50% increase compared to Pentium M or Core duo? A lot of the stats intel has on their sites is compared to Pentium M...

 

[Rodstermac]

It is the Pentium M I believe. I am hunting the page down again.

 

[dbxz]

its up to 17% potential losses for apple now... thats like 30 grand on these forums alone they might lose and this poll was done on "macforums" too who knows how many ppl might not move to a mac because they can get a pc with better specs for less... I think apple should get their **** together and update already!

 

[-::ubermann::-]

i was about to purchase a macbook, but my father didnt give me money, now im deciding again between mac or pc
i think apple's stability was caused by the fact that, they released a model of mac, much less options and much less often than we have with pc's, now that it uses intel, could it maintain the stability with more frecuent hardware upgrades? or it will be like any other pc with linux?