Apple's future in mobile computing
Apple's announcements this week expanded the range of the MacBook Pro product line, which now covers starting prices from $1,199 to $2,499.
In effect, the Pro line has absorbed the aluminum-cased models from the MacBook line, which is now reduced to a single model with a white plastic case, a look that debuted over three years ago.
Apple's 13-inch MacBook Pro.
(Credit: Apple)Some "Pro" models now have features that used to be hallmarks of the basic MacBook notebooks: integrated graphics and no ExpressCard slot. I think of these as consumer-oriented choices, and I'll throw in the standard glossy screen finish on the 13-inch and 15-inch models. A glossy screen looks better for movies, but it's unacceptable for some professional users.
Consumers should be happy to migrate to the MacBook Pro line, since they can now get features and options never before offered on MacBooks: FireWire 800, for example, and support for up to 8GB of DRAM.
Professional users, on the other hand, are now reduced to just one good choice: the 17-inch MacBook Pro, which includes an ExpressCard slot and can be ordered with an antiglare screen.
So in a way, Apple's newly expanded notebook line is narrower than it used to be -- there's room both above and below, especially if the plastic MacBook is allowed to fade gracefully into history.
At this point it's worth observing that Apple didn't announce a new tablet computer or netbook at WWDC, in spite of widespread rumors that such devices are under development. Is the merger of the MacBook and MacBook Pro product lines Apple's way of preparing the way for a new line of low-cost machines?
In fact, there could be room for two new lines: systems based on Intel processors and Nvidia chipsets like Apple's notebooks, and less capable but less expensive systems based on the ARM platform used in the iPhone and iPod touch. But I think there will only be one, for two reasons: performance and price.
Apple's new iPhone 3G S.
(Credit: Apple)Apple says the iPhone 3G S is "up to 2X faster" than the regular 3G iPhone, though the company hasn't said whether the improvement comes from hardware, software, or both. Regardless, the performance of the iPhone platform is shading up into the low end of PC territory, certainly not far from the levels we associate with the cheapest netbooks.
The iPhone is also priced higher than cheap notebooks: $699 for the 32GB version of the 3G S when purchased without a service contract (what AT&T calls the "retail price"). Even the 32GB iPod touch costs $399, much of the difference due to the absence of the iPhone's 3G, GPS, and digital-compass circuitry.
These prices aren't so high because the iPhone and iPod touch are intrinsically expensive; it's because Apple uses premium parts, spends a lot of money on advertising, and expects to make a good profit on its sales. None of these concerns apply to low-end PCs, which have been heavily commoditized.
If Apple offered a tablet designed like a large iPod touch, it would have to be priced above the iPod touch. With all the iPhone's extra features, the retail price would have to be $799 or more. That wouldn't leave much room for yet another layer of Intel-based systems under the existing MacBook Pro line.
What might appear at the $999 price point after Apple retires the old plastic MacBook, I can't guess. That would be a high price for an ARM-based system, but cheap for a machine sharing the unibody aluminum construction of the MacBook Pro family. I suppose I'll just have to wait and be surprised.
Peter N. Glaskowsky is a computer architect in Silicon Valley and a technology analyst for the Envisioneering Group. He has designed chip- and board-level products in the defense and computer industries, managed design teams, and served as editor in chief of the industry newsletter "Microprocessor Report." He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure. 
The gap would be filled with iPod Touch Pro tablet(s), since the notebook line has expanded in the "Pro + Air series...
On a side note, I still can't understand why a matte screen is not an available option for the 15" as well as the 17".
I think that's part of the author's point - the lineup is rather confused right now, with 2 consumer laptops (the aging white MacBook and the Air, which has no FireWire), just one true Pro laptop (17" with ExpressCard, FW800, non-glare screen), and two that are stuck in between (they have FW800, but no ExpressCard and one has no dedicated graphics memory) - "ProSumer MacBooks" perhaps?
Some of us were pretty disappointed yesterday that the 15" Pro model lost some of its "pro"-ness by losing it's ExpressCard in favor of a SD slot, a decidedly consumer feature. Pro graphics/video people (and music/recording engineers who use mobile ExpressCard interfaces) now only have one actual Pro option. We're scratching our heads here and wondering where the MacBook Pros went?
Even with as many pro photographers use SD, there is a strong proportion of pro models that still use CF cards. I know many, in fact, that use the express card slot in conjunction with a reader so it's like they've got a built in CF reader in their notebook.
Then there are audio professionals. I use my express slot for a fast connection to an audio/Midi I/O box. Now, it seems that apple has relegated people with such hardware to the 17" notebook line, and concurrently the higher price bracket.
I think the real question here is whether apple is continuing its tradition of targeting its 'Pro notebook line to professionals of many major disciplines or trying to bump consumers up into the pro market, whetting their taste for more mobile power.
it's cheaper and more convinient to buy one of the 13" notebooks and get a external monitor
High-end phones have historically tracked computers in terms of processor power, RAM, and similar parameters with a lag of 6-7 years. (Norm Fjeldheim of Qualcomm showed this on slides at a conference a few years back. I don't know if the concept originated with him, but I can at least credit my immediate source.) In other words, we should expect something like a new iPhone to perform internally about the same as a PC (using the term generically, not implying Windows) of about 2002. There are obvious human interface issues associated with screen size and keyboards with a variety of solutions (none of them widely standardized or always appropriate), and mass storage can be a concern in some applications, but the general concept holds true. A 2002-era PC was a very useful device for many purposes. We shouldn't be surprised that the iPhone and its competitors are also, if the human interface issues are dealt with - and one of Apple's strengths is dealing with them.
The consistent timelag is just a consequence of Moore's Law. I think the interval is generally longer than 6-7 years, but it varies, and of course it depends on what you're comparing the high-end phones to: high-end PCs, entry-level PCs, mainstream notebooks, or whatever.
As a concrete example, the Dell Optiplex G1 was released in 1998 with a Pentium II processor at 266-450 MHz, comparable to the performance of the ARM core in an iPhone. It supported up to 256MB of RAM (the iPhone has 128MB) and hard disks in the same size range as the iPhone's solid-state storage.
I would say the macbook pro line is as strong as it's ever been. We finally have a 13' model that matches 90% of the options of the 17" model and they lowered the base price of the 15" model to $1699 which hasn't seen that price in years.
But I still want my headless iMac with the video card of the top-of-the-line iMac.
Believe it. There are PCI cards that audio pros use that (obviously) can't be connected to a mobile mac any other way, such as the UAD-2 cards and ProTools users who use the Magma ExpressBox. Not everything can connect via FireWire.
. png
Said pros would be advised to upgrade their equipment. I find it hard to believe the small price difference between a 15 and 17" MBP is anything but chump change to people who charge thousands of dollars and up a day for studio time.
I think what you really meant was "audio amateurs and advanced hobbyists".
- by Constable Odo June 9, 2009 7:09 PM PDT
- Almost as soon as I got my MacBook Pro, I went out and bought a SDHC adapter and 8 GB SDHC card for for the Express Card 34 slot and have been using it that way ever since. My camera also uses a SD card so it's convenient to load the photos quickly to the MacBook.
- Reply to this comment
-
-
- by Peter Glaskowsky June 10, 2009 3:36 PM PDT
- SDHC is very slow, however. Actually, so are most ExpressCard SSDs, since they tend to use the USB interface on the ExpressCard connector instead of the PCI Express interface. Perhaps the fact that SSD vendors are taking the cheap way out on ExpressCard drives factored into Apple's decision.
-
-
(14 Comments)I did just notice recently that the Express Card 34 slot could be used with a 32 or 48 GB SSD device that also has a mini USB port. That's a pretty good way to boot quickly from the SSD. I'm glad Apple added an SDHC slot. That's the way to go for portable storage nowadays.