Feeds
90%
Apple MacBook Pro 13in June 2009

Apple MacBook Pro 13in June 2009 release

Apple finally notices there's a recession

  • alert
  • submit to reddit

Choosing a cloud hosting partner with confidence

Review Apple has always kept a clear dividing line between consumer products for home and education users, and more expensive professional models offering higher performance and additional features. And, until quite recently, its laptop range had stuck rigidly to that formula.

Apple MacBook Pro 13in June 2009

Apple's MacBook Pro 13in

However, Apple muddied the waters last October when it unveiled a completely redesigned version of the MacBook that boasted a new aluminium ‘unibody’ design that made it look much more like the MacBook Pro. The new design was extremely attractive, but it also came with a hefty price hike that took the starting point to just under £1000.

Apple somewhat grudgingly acknowledged that it probably wasn’t a good idea to hit its customers with such a big price rise right in the middle of a global financial apocalypse. So it quietly kept one of the old white plastic MacBook models on sale as well in order to appease the price-sensitive education market that is so important to Apple.

So where did that leave unibody MacBook? It was a lot more expensive than the White MacBook that was still on the shelves, yet it lacked features such as the high-speed Firewire interface that justified the higher price of the MacBook Pro. It was, as our old granny used to say, neither one thing nor t’other.

A rethink was clearly in order and, as a result, the unibody MacBook has now been promoted to the rank of MacBook Pro, making it the first 13in model to carry that name. That move also maintains the recently updated white plastic MacBook to its position as the model for home users and students.

Apple MacBook Pro 13in June 2009

The MacBook Pro is actually thinner than the 13in MacBook

There are two versions of the 13in MacBook Pro available, starting at £899 for a model with 2.26GHz Core 2 Duo processor, 2GB of RAM, and 160GB hard disk. That compares to £949 for its predecessor, which ran at 2.0GHz. There’s also a 2.53GHz model that we test here, which costs £1149.

Beginner's guide to SSL certificates

More from The Register

next story
Ex-US Navy fighter pilot MIT prof: Drones beat humans - I should know
'Missy' Cummings on UAVs, smartcars and dying from boredom
Don't wait for that big iPad, order a NEXUS 9 instead, industry little bird says
Google said to debut next big slab, Android L ahead of Apple event
Xperia Z3: Crikey, Sony – ANOTHER flagship phondleslab?
The Fourth Amendment... and it IS better
Microsoft to enter the STRUGGLE of the HUMAN WRIST
It's not just a thumb war, it's total digit war
Netscape Navigator - the browser that started it all - turns 20
It was 20 years ago today, Marc Andreeesen taught the band to play
A drone of one's own: Reg buyers' guide for UAV fanciers
Hardware: Check. Software: Huh? Licence: Licence...?
The Apple launch AS IT HAPPENED: Totally SERIOUS coverage, not for haters
Fandroids, Windows Phone fringe-oids – you wouldn't understand
Apple SILENCES Bose, YANKS headphones from stores
The, er, Beats go on after noise-cancelling spat
prev story

Whitepapers

Forging a new future with identity relationship management
Learn about ForgeRock's next generation IRM platform and how it is designed to empower CEOS's and enterprises to engage with consumers.
Cloud and hybrid-cloud data protection for VMware
Learn how quick and easy it is to configure backups and perform restores for VMware environments.
Three 1TB solid state scorchers up for grabs
Big SSDs can be expensive but think big and think free because you could be the lucky winner of one of three 1TB Samsung SSD 840 EVO drives that we’re giving away worth over £300 apiece.
Reg Reader Research: SaaS based Email and Office Productivity Tools
Read this Reg reader report which provides advice and guidance for SMBs towards the use of SaaS based email and Office productivity tools.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.