PDA

View Full Version : Intel iBook (MacBook) Arriving in May? and 17'' MacBook Pro?


Pages : [1] 2 3

MacRumors
Apr 7, 2006, 01:40 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

ThinkSecret claims (http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0604macbook.html) that Apple has begun manufacturing the new "MacBook" (Intel iBook) which should be available in the next 30-60 days.

According to the rumor site, the newest version of the iBook will indeed be rebranded as a "MacBook" and will come with a 13.3" widescreen display with 1280x720 resolution.

The upcoming MacBook is said to share internal components with the recently released Mac mini which comes in both Core Solo and Core Duo configurations. The new MacBook will therefore replace both the current 12" and 14" iBooks as well as the 12" PowerBook G4. This corroborates a similar report (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/04/20060403221422.shtml) that new iBooks were in production to be delivered by June. The iBook was last updated (http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/) in July 2005.

Meanwhile, a 17" MacBook Pro with brighter display is also in the works and should arrive around the same time. The 17" MacBook Pro is said to be otherwise similar to the current 15" MacBook Pro.

BlizzardBomb
Apr 7, 2006, 01:43 PM
1280x720 (16:9) is an odd resolution for Apple who prefers to use 16:10. I thought they'd go for 1280x800.

Proud Liberal
Apr 7, 2006, 01:44 PM
a bit OT, but I wonder if we'll see a mid-cycle upgrade to the 5G iPod at the same time, i.e. 60GB --> 80GB...

wkhahn
Apr 7, 2006, 01:45 PM
It would be cool if these were available in black or white, like the iPods are now.

devilot
Apr 7, 2006, 01:46 PM
I guess it's about time that the screens were upgraded and such... but I really do prefer for it to be smaller and even more portable. :o Can't wait to see what they look like!

parrothead
Apr 7, 2006, 01:46 PM
I think it is a bad idea to rename the ibook to MacBook. There is not enough difference between MacBook Pro. People will get confused. Plus, the name iBook is so well known now, to change it doesn't make any sense.

BlizzardBomb
Apr 7, 2006, 01:47 PM
Meanwhile, a 17" MacBook Pro with brighter display is also in the works and should arrive around the same time. The 17" MacBook Pro is said to be otherwise similar to the current 15" MacBook.

Should read "The 17" MacBook Pro is said to be otherwise similar to the current 15" MacBook Pro."

darh
Apr 7, 2006, 01:47 PM
It would be cool if these were available in black or white, like the iPods are now.

Since its a replacement for the iBook AND the powerbook, there should be multiple colors, or just only aluminium...

Cue
Apr 7, 2006, 01:47 PM
The upcoming MacBook is said to share internal components with the recently released Mac mini

no dual display then? :/

dr_lha
Apr 7, 2006, 01:48 PM
no dual display then? :/
Does the GMA950 not support dual display then? I thought it did.

TheMonarch
Apr 7, 2006, 01:48 PM
I still don't get why it would be re-branded as "MacBook".

The "i" was a consumer thing. iBook + iPod + iMac. Or should we expect a "MacPod" soon.

Ugh, I'm going to miss the old name.

ebuc
Apr 7, 2006, 01:49 PM
So, I was trying to convince a friend to buy a MacBook Pro for college. And one of the benefits (as I explained to him) is that once he buys a MacBook Pro he can check MacRumors every hour to see when the next Macbook Pro is coming out.

Lo and behold, I go to MacRumors and see a 5-minute old post about updated MacBook Pros (and MacBooks).

So many reasons to buy one.

Eidorian
Apr 7, 2006, 01:49 PM
*waits for 10.5 first*

Seriously, I bought iLife '06 and that's the most updating I'll do. I'll just wait for iLife '07 and 10.5 to come standard on whatever new Mac I pick. Still, the more revisions before then the better. Bring them out sooner!

notmenotyou
Apr 7, 2006, 01:49 PM
30 - 60 days?!?!?!?! i need it NOW, my TiBook is really falling apart and can't afford the MBP.... :(

iHotu
Apr 7, 2006, 01:50 PM
k

dejo
Apr 7, 2006, 01:50 PM
1280x720 (16:9) is an odd resolution for Apple who prefers to use 16:10. I thought they'd go for 1280x800.

True, but allows native HD resolution (720p).

peanut48
Apr 7, 2006, 01:50 PM
jus when i had made up my mind to stop waiting for the rumored macbook and go get a 12" pb....this is gonna drive me crazy again...:eek: dont know how long it'll continue..

lazyboy922
Apr 7, 2006, 01:51 PM
This is sweet news! I really can't wait for the new CS suite to come out from adobe, so at least I will be able to run my old CS that I have for windows. I really hope Apple announces them soon, and has them on their website!

MacFan782040
Apr 7, 2006, 01:52 PM
I also agree with the colors idea (black and white) like the iPods, as well as the MacBook name getting too confused with the MacBook Pro.

I often find myself unintentionally dropping the "Pro" and just saying MacBook...which could definitly get confusing if the iBook becomes a MacBook. But who knows. What's the difference between saying an iPod nano is not simply an "iPod". MacBook may become synomous with culture like the iPod did, and when people go to purchace one, they see they have 3 choices: MacBook (iBook) and MacBook Pro (15", 17").

With that said, I wonder if it will retain the same design?

bill4588
Apr 7, 2006, 01:53 PM
this is great news. i hope they're released before my graduation (cuz im gettin one as my gift). I wonder how much they'll cost?

shortyjj
Apr 7, 2006, 01:53 PM
"said to share internal components"

Integrated graphics? Ugh.

nagromme
Apr 7, 2006, 01:53 PM
As long as there's a small Core Duo Mac laptop, I don't care whether it's conceptually aligned with the iBook/MacBook or PowerBook/MacBook Pro names.

A decent GPU in a small Core Duo laptop would be especially welcome, though, along with lighted keys. As close to the power of the 15.4" as possible, given the smaller size. We'll see what we get!

I'm sure the low-end iBook replacement will have integrated graphics--it's cheaper and it's all many low-end buyers need. It makes sense in the Mini and any other entry-level machine.

pkkrusty
Apr 7, 2006, 01:54 PM
If 'sharing components with Mac Mini' means the MacBook will have Integrated Graphics, then Apple will be even more of a sellout then when they did it with the mini.

Don't give the excuse that most people don't need a dedicated graphics card. That's the rationale Dell uses on its $400 POS computers. You all know deep down that it is a bad move. I'll bet Steve Jobs does also.

fixyourthinking
Apr 7, 2006, 01:54 PM
Wonder if it'll have firewire and an iSight.

Eidorian
Apr 7, 2006, 01:54 PM
1280x720 (16:9) is an odd resolution for Apple who prefers to use 16:10. I thought they'd go for 1280x800.One more thing, I would have named it the iBook HD. >_>

mark88
Apr 7, 2006, 01:54 PM
I think it is a bad idea to rename the ibook to MacBook. There is not enough difference between MacBook Pro. People will get confused. Plus, the name iBook is so well known now, to change it doesn't make any sense.

I agree, they've still got the Imac so I dont see why they couldn't keep iBook.

Cabbit
Apr 7, 2006, 01:54 PM
True, but allows native HD resolution (720p).
now theres a big plus and 720p is about all the low core solos and low core duos can manage its only the >1.8 that seem to manage 1080p

swingerofbirch
Apr 7, 2006, 01:54 PM
this is what i have been saving my money for

right now i have a 1 ghz emac (that hums loudly) and takes up too much space

and an emachines tower connected to a 15" CRT (that hums very loudly) and takes up even more space that i need for work for a windows specific app...

i can get rid of both with a tiny, tiny laptop, yay!!!!!!!

AndrewMT
Apr 7, 2006, 01:55 PM
the 17" Macbook should have no less than a Geforce 7800 or 7900 Go with 256mb of memory. Now that we can dual boot, and play windows games, it's more important then ever to have a top-of-the-line graphics card to compete with laptops like the Dell XPS2.

Twenty1
Apr 7, 2006, 01:55 PM
I'll be curious if the new Macbook has integrated graphics. I'm not a gamer, but one of the reason's my G3 iBook has lasted three and half years is due to the dedicated 32 MB video card. I'm really in the market for a new iBook/MacBook so I hope the system is worth while.

fixyourthinking
Apr 7, 2006, 01:56 PM
I still don't get why it would be re-branded as "MacBook".

The "i" was a consumer thing. iBook + iPod + iMac. Or should we expect a "MacPod" soon.

Ugh, I'm going to miss the old name.

I agree ... one move that no matter what the benefit is (mentally for getting the name Mac out there) ... I still liked "Power" and "I"

swingerofbirch
Apr 7, 2006, 01:57 PM
I agree, they've still got the Imac so I dont see why they couldn't keep iBook.
I think it's because iMac has "mac" in the name, whereas iBook does not. iMac probably has more brand recognition too.

dr_lha
Apr 7, 2006, 01:57 PM
If 'sharing components with Mac Mini' means the MacBook will have Integrated Graphics, then Apple will be even more of a sellout then when they did it with the mini.

Don't give the excuse that most people don't need a dedicated graphics card. That's the rationale Dell uses on its $400 POS computers. You all know deep down that it is a bad move. I'll bet Steve Jobs does also.
Enough of this. Seriously - enough.

The GMA 950 is a fine GFX card for 2D and light 3D work. It handles video excellently, and Core Image stuff works great with it.

The iBook is not a games machine. Its a student level laptop for doing word processing/internet etc. The GMA 950 is fine for this, and will more than adequately power a 1280x720 screen (hell it beautifully runs my 1680x1050 screen).

Integrated graphics are hear to stay on the low end, live with it or spend the money on a "Pro" machine.

devilot
Apr 7, 2006, 01:58 PM
I agree, they've still got the Imac so I dont see why they couldn't keep iBook.I think Steve Jobs has been quoted saying he wants to implement the actual word, 'Mac' into the machines' names-- brand association? So iMac has Mac in it, but iBook does not. :p

:edit: Dang it swingerofbirch beat me to it.

miloblithe
Apr 7, 2006, 01:59 PM
Depending on how tight the design is, this 13.3" computer could be smaller than the 12" iBook, although bigger than the 12" PowerBook. It'll still be nice and portable.

zen
Apr 7, 2006, 01:59 PM
True, but allows native HD resolution (720p).
The MacBook Pro is 16:9 - the space at the top of the screen is occupied by the built-in camera. If the MacBook (iBook) is also 16:9, this suggests it will also have a camera.

And yes, 16:9 is a much more sensible ratio.

adroit
Apr 7, 2006, 02:00 PM
The new core duo 13" MacBook better not have an integrated graphics.... otherwise I would be very very angry :mad:.

BlizzardBomb
Apr 7, 2006, 02:00 PM
Integrated graphics have come a long way. Intel are supposed to be releasing another chipset soon called the G965, which is highly likely to find its way into the next Mini and MacBook (if the MB does have Integrated Graphics). It supports DDR 800 and Shader Model 3.0 (Pixel + Vertex!), so it should perform much better.

The MacBook Pro is 16:9 - the space at the top of the screen is occupied by the built-in camera. If the MacBook (iBook) is also 16:9, this suggests it will also have a camera.

Last time I checked, 1440x900 is 16:10.

dr_lha
Apr 7, 2006, 02:01 PM
now theres a big plus and 720p is about all the low core solos and low core duos can manage its only the >1.8 that seem to manage 1080p
If you read this site at all, which I think you do, you should have seen already that the 1.66Mhz Core Duo Minis can handle 1080p just fine.

JZ Wire
Apr 7, 2006, 02:01 PM
Finally! Id love to own a MacBook Core Duo. I need a laptop but nothing too fancy or expensive as a MacBok Pro. The high-end Core Duo MacBook will be perfect for school, email, Word, etc. But like someone said earlier, ill wait till Leopard before I buy. Not only because I want 10.5 pre-installed on my laptop but also id rather not get the first batch since they can sometimes suffer some unexpected quirks. Heres hoping for a nice, thin, sleek MacBook soon!!!
:D :D :cool:

devilot
Apr 7, 2006, 02:02 PM
*waits for 10.5 first*

Seriously, I bought iLife '06 and that's the most updating I'll do. I'll just wait for iLife '07 and 10.5 to come standard on whatever new Mac I pick. Still, the more revisions before then the better. Bring them out sooner!Can I have your permission to make this post into a wallpaper for all of my Macs?

It's so hard to resist new hardware. :o And you pose such helpful reasons to wait.

budugu
Apr 7, 2006, 02:02 PM
With Boot Camp now available, a 13.3-inch Core Duo laptop looks appealing!

I'm assuming though that being a consumer model, it won't have DVI out and (out of the box) monitor spanning?

(am I the first post?)

If they take the 12" powerbook out they will give the 13" a Opitical Out and DVI out of the box ...all of the *new macs* have DVi and ability to span.

nagromme
Apr 7, 2006, 02:02 PM
FWIW, AppleInsider today doesn't expect a Core Solo laptop, only Duos. (I'm skeptical--having an offering on the low-end makes sense to me.)

http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1659

loveturtle
Apr 7, 2006, 02:02 PM
I can't wait, i've been waiting for the 17" all year.
I keep getting so close to breaking down and just buying the 15"...
I would buy the 17" right now if i could..

I hope the resolution is decent though, my current 15.4" laptop is 1920x1200 and I like it like that!

All I can say is Apple, please hurry up so I can give you some money! kthx.

ImAlwaysRight
Apr 7, 2006, 02:02 PM
The upcoming MacBook is said to share internal components with the recently released Mac mini which comes in both Core Solo and Core Duo configurations. The new MacBook will therefore replace both the current 12" and 14" iBooks as well as the 12" PowerBook G4. This corroborates a similar report (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/04/20060403221422.shtml) that new iBooks were in production to be delivered by June. The iBook was last updated (http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/) in July 2005.
I don't like this one bit because it means they will use the 12" iBook G4 as their $799 entry level laptop, the Macbook 1.5 core solo for $999, and Macbook core duo 1.67 for maybe $1299 or $1399. I sure hope it doesn't have integrated graphics for the duo. Also, I hope they offer a 1.83GHz model for $200 higher than the 1.67.

I was really hoping the entire Macbook line would have core duos, but ranging from 1.67 to 1.83GHz. :mad:

Eidorian
Apr 7, 2006, 02:02 PM
Can I have your permission to make this post into a wallpaper for all of my Macs?

It's so hard to resist new hardware. :o And you pose such helpful reasons to wait.Fine by me. :D

radian23
Apr 7, 2006, 02:03 PM
I wonder what the price of the MB is going to be. I bet it will be $1500 with a 1.83 core duo, 512 MB ram, 64 MB video memory, with an isight all inside an aluminum enclosure.

boncellis
Apr 7, 2006, 02:03 PM
I think the pricepoint is really the critical issue here. I don't see a big problem with Apple slimming down their line of notebooks because they should all be very capable machines, but it will be interesting to see how the "low end" iBook replacement is received--it all depends on the price. At $1299 the Core Duo would be fantastic, I think. Somehow I see it higher though.

RollTide
Apr 7, 2006, 02:03 PM
I think that using some of the macmini parts was a good idea, I mean if you have to make all new parts, your price goes up, this will help the new ibook appeal to more people, makes since from an engineering standpoint

Thataboy
Apr 7, 2006, 02:05 PM
I think eventually the MacBook will be at 999/1299, but, like the Mac minis, I would guess they start out at a 100 early-adopter premium. Therefore, I expect 1099/1399.

I agree with others who believe the MacBook should come in white and black. I think the iMac should as well. Buyers have shown that they LIKE the black in consumer-level Apple products. I do hope the MacBook design is more refreshed than the MacBook Pro's was.

Announce it already, Apple!! :p

BlizzardBomb
Apr 7, 2006, 02:05 PM
I think that using some of the macmini parts was a good idea, I mean if you have to make all new parts, your price goes up, this will help the new ibook appeal to more people, makes since from an engineering standpoint

Great point. The more they buy, the cheaper it gets (for Apple anyway). :)

crees!
Apr 7, 2006, 02:06 PM
Woo!

Almost time for me to get my first mac :)
I felt the same antipication right before the 15" Alu PBs were released. I think I'll wait till 2007/Leopard to get a new Mac whatever it may be.

budugu
Apr 7, 2006, 02:06 PM
Integrated graphics has come a long way. Intel are supposed to be releasing a another chipset soon called the G965, which is highly likely to find its way into the new Mini and MacBook (if the MB does have Integrated Graphics). It supports DDR 800 and Shader Model 3.0 (Pixel + Vertex!). So it should perform much better.



Last time I checked, 1440x900 is 16:10.


Integrated esp Intel ones are a little tricky ... on paper GM900/950 have better (twice the pipelines etc) than x200 (IGP) or heck even x300 (lowend, almost the same as x200 just not IGP). But you can play all games with x300 and x200 but most of the new games will not be playable on intel IGPs. So you might want to watch out! I think the IGP/Dedicated graphics is going to be the way to up-sell more 'pro' stuff.

dr_lha
Apr 7, 2006, 02:06 PM
I think the pricepoint is really the critical issue here. I don't see a big problem with Apple slimming down their line of notebooks because they should all be very capable machines, but it will be interesting to see how the "low end" iBook replacement is received--it all depends on the price. At $1299 the Core Duo would be fantastic, I think. Somehow I see it higher though.
I hope not. That magic sub $1000 price is something they really need to keep. That said, I thought the same (and still do) about the mini.

mark88
Apr 7, 2006, 02:06 PM
I think it's because iMac has "mac" in the name, whereas iBook does not. iMac probably has more brand recognition too.

I see, makes sense I guess.

Does this mean no smaller MacBook Pro also?

ImAlwaysRight
Apr 7, 2006, 02:07 PM
FWIW, AppleInsider today doesn't expect a Core Solo laptop, only Duos. (I'm skeptical--having an offering on the low-end makes sense to me.)

http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1659
Oh, thank the Lord! :) Thinksecret has been waaaay off base in their rumors this past year. Appleinsider has been right on the nose. I'd put my money on Appleinsider.

I would be willing to go for the low end at $999 if it is a core duo with combo drive. (I have an external FW 400 16x DL burner.) But only if the entire Macbook line has integrated graphics. If the high end Macbook has a 128MB X1300 or something in it plus Superdrive and larger hard drive, then I'd pony up the extra $$$ for the more expensive one vs. integrated graphics.

Eidorian
Apr 7, 2006, 02:08 PM
Integrated graphics have come a long way. Intel are supposed to be releasing another chipset soon called the G965, which is highly likely to find its way into the next Mini and MacBook (if the MB does have Integrated Graphics). It supports DDR 800 and Shader Model 3.0 (Pixel + Vertex!), so it should perform much better.
It looks yummy but I want to see it in action. I've seen X300's and 6200's beat the GMA950. :rolleyes:

dejo
Apr 7, 2006, 02:08 PM
The MacBook Pro is 16:9 - the space at the top of the screen is occupied by the built-in camera. If the MacBook (iBook) is also 16:9, this suggests it will also have a camera.

And yes, 16:9 is a much more sensible ratio.

The MacBook Pro is not 16:9. It is 1440x900 which translates to 1.6:1 whereas 16:9 is 1.78:1. Even if it did, it wouldn't have a native HD resolution (either 720p or 1080p). I think this is important since it allows full-screen, non-scaled HD content to be displayed. Less heavy-lifting involved. :)

pkkrusty
Apr 7, 2006, 02:08 PM
"The iBook is not a games machine. Its a student level laptop for doing word processing/internet etc. The GMA 950 is fine for this, and will more than adequately power a 1280x720 screen (hell it beautifully runs my 1680x1050 screen)."

Because college students only do word processing? Last time i checked, college students A) are on a budget and B) play video games more than any other group of people out there.

I have an iBook and push the graphics card as far as it will go to play games, photoshop, and whatever else. You cannot say it wasn't made for gaming when every version before it had a 32MB card. That is a decent amount for certain types of games especially for a person on a budget. Until someone can prove that the Integrated Graphics are equivalent to the 32MB card before it, IT IS A STEP DOWN. Period. And a bad move. I, and I think most people, would trade that little extra size for a dedicated graphics card. It may be a cost issue, but haven't Apples historically been a little more expensive?

For me at least, I'm willing to earn that extra $100 to spend on something with a 32MB card.

boncellis
Apr 7, 2006, 02:09 PM
I hope not. That magic sub $1000 price is something they really need to keep. That said, I thought the same (and still do) about the mini.

You're absolutely right (call me a cynic, I guess). Maybe Apple will lower the price on the G4 iBook to fill the void for that "cheap" Macintosh notebook. When will it be EOL'd?

BlizzardBomb
Apr 7, 2006, 02:10 PM
It looks yummy but I want to see it in action. I've seen X300's and 6200's beat the GMA950. :rolleyes:

Apparently the G965 is pretty much on par with a 128MB X300.

macridah
Apr 7, 2006, 02:11 PM
With Boot Camp now available, a 13.3-inch Core Duo laptop looks appealing!

I'm assuming though that being a consumer model, it won't have DVI out and (out of the box) monitor spanning?

(am I the first post?)

Yup, I have been waiting for this. Now I can laugh at my friend you just bought a sony SZ series notebook.

sdavis8888
Apr 7, 2006, 02:12 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

The upcoming MacBook is said to share internal components with the recently released Mac mini which comes in both Core Solo and Core Duo configurations.

I use a 12" Powerbook as my sole computer for Photoshop and significant design work - integrated graphics would be a no-go for me. I want a small but very powerful laptop. At the office I am always using an external monitor and my laptop screen for menus or other applications, not having this option would be a deal killer. I hope that thinksecert is wrong or that upgraded graphics are a BTO option in the 13.3-inch form factor. (Although upgraded graphics aren't a usual BTO options for Apple laptops.:( )

Eidorian
Apr 7, 2006, 02:12 PM
Apparently the G965 is pretty much on par with a 128MB X300.So I've read.

http://www.nforcershq.com/article5542.html

http://www.digitimes.com/mobos/a20060403A2006.html

iBrow
Apr 7, 2006, 02:12 PM
I Personally still think they should bring out a 12"/13.3" MacBook Pro. Because some people mite need a portable laptop and a good video card like a X1600 or a X1300 and a GMA950 wont cut it.

BlizzardBomb
Apr 7, 2006, 02:13 PM
Yup, I have been waiting for this. Now I can laugh at my friend you just bought a sony SZ series notebook.

I can see a 13.3" MacBook and 20" ACD (or Dell display if your really tight ;) ) making a great low-budget combo. :)

dr_lha
Apr 7, 2006, 02:14 PM
Because college students only do word processing? Last time i checked, college students A) are on a budget and B) play video games more than any other group of people out there.
On consoles. I know a lot of college students, and PC gaming is not a big thing with them. The nerds who are into PC gaming will buy PC gaming rigs, not iBooks to game on.

lonelemur90
Apr 7, 2006, 02:14 PM
YES! i hav been waiting for these. as a student, one of these would be more practical than a macbook pro, plus i could max out the ram and up the hdd. It will be great when they finally come out hopefully soon, and hopefully widescreen.:D

dr_lha
Apr 7, 2006, 02:15 PM
You're absolutely right (call me a cynic, I guess). Maybe Apple will lower the price on the G4 iBook to fill the void for that "cheap" Macintosh notebook. When will it be EOL'd?
Almost immediately if you believe the reports. I imagine they may do a G5 iMac style price drop however.

ImAlwaysRight
Apr 7, 2006, 02:15 PM
Apple to ditch iBook brand alongside notebook launch (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1659)

The good news for Mac enthusiasts and prospective MacBook buyers is that they'll soon be able to place orders for the new notebooks. People often familiar with the Cupertino, Calif.-based Apple's product roll-out plans say it is now up to company management to O.K. the MacBooks for manufacturing ramp.I think I just wet myself!

Reports that have suggested Apple would not unveil its new consumer notebooks until June appear to be inaccurate.Thank you, Think Secret! (turds) :p

Unlike Apple's entry-level Mac mini consumer desktops, which are available with either an Intel Core Solo or Core Duo processor, each MacBook is expected to pack at least a 1.67GHz Core Duo chip. The notebooks will be available in several configurations, each built around a vibrant 13-inch widescreen display.

Like Apple's MacBook Pro professional notebooks, the new consumer MacBooks are expected to sport a built-in iSight video camera, a MagSafe power adaptor and come bundled with Apple's Front Row and Photo Booth software applications.

Previous reports have also suggested the MacBook will boast some new proprietary Apple technology such as a completely magnetic latching system that will adhere the display module to the computer component without the need for a physical latching mechanism.I just wet myself again!!!

Electro Funk
Apr 7, 2006, 02:16 PM
1280x720 (16:9) is an odd resolution for Apple who prefers to use 16:10. I thought they'd go for 1280x800.

1280x720p is HD... I have a 46" Samsung DLP that is the same resolution... when fed a HD signal it looks amazing...;) I think it displays and handles fast action sports better than 1080i... (1080p is a different story!)

GFLPraxis
Apr 7, 2006, 02:17 PM
Enough of this. Seriously - enough.

The GMA 950 is a fine GFX card for 2D and light 3D work. It handles video excellently, and Core Image stuff works great with it.

The iBook is not a games machine. Its a student level laptop for doing word processing/internet etc. The GMA 950 is fine for this, and will more than adequately power a 1280x720 screen (hell it beautifully runs my 1680x1050 screen).

Integrated graphics are hear to stay on the low end, live with it or spend the money on a "Pro" machine.

In Windows, a Radeon 9200 can run Star Wars Battlefront. The current iBook has a Radeon 9550. It may not be the most modern card but it's enough to play many/most modern PC games on lower settings.

I'm sorry, but the GMA 950 is a *downgrade*. Consumers want to play casual games too. We're not talking Half-Life 2 at max settings here. Consumers will play at 640x480 if it just runs.

Maybe you're sick of people complaining about it, but I'm sick of the apologists that keep saying, "Oh, you want to play casual games? Go spend twice as much on a pro machine! I don't care if you don't have that much money!". I can build a $400 PC with a Geforce FX 5200 that can play games the Mac Mini won't run. I want the iBook to be able to because I can't upgrade it at a later point.

BlizzardBomb
Apr 7, 2006, 02:17 PM
You're absolutely right (call me a cynic, I guess). Maybe Apple will lower the price on the G4 iBook to fill the void for that "cheap" Macintosh notebook. When will it be EOL'd?

I think Apple might want to get rid of G4s as soon as possible so I'd doubt they'd stay.

$949? - 13.3" MacBook Solo 1.5Ghz
$1249? - 13.3" MacBook Duo 1.66Ghz

ImAlwaysRight
Apr 7, 2006, 02:19 PM
I imagine they may do a G5 iMac style price drop however.I agree, I would guess $799 for the 12" iBook G4 to compete more with low-end PC laptops, and the entry Macbook would probably come in at $999. If Apple also raises the entry-level Macbook to $1099 and $1499 for the upper, well, that would just be WRONG! :(

Eidorian
Apr 7, 2006, 02:27 PM
I'd expect to see three iBook models.

- Solo Core, Combo Drive ($799)
- Solo Core, SuperDrive ($999)
- Duo Core, SuperDrive ($1199)

boncellis
Apr 7, 2006, 02:28 PM
I think Apple might want to get rid of G4s as soon as possible so I'd doubt they'd stay.

$949? - 13.3" MacBook Solo 1.5Ghz
$1249? - 13.3" MacBook Duo 1.66Ghz

I see your point, especially when you consider all the excitement and attention Apple is receiving over the Boot Camp functionality--maybe keeping the G4s around would cause confusion (or even a backlash) among consumers who want to switch but are unfamiliar with the PPC architecture.

As far as that pricing scheme goes, I think it's a little bit too low as the current G4 offerings are at $999 and $1299. Also, one has to take into account the added iSight, MagSafe, remote, etc. Probably not much when the cost is spread out, but it has to add up somewhere. And those Core Duo processors still ain't cheap! ;)

Photorun
Apr 7, 2006, 02:29 PM
... and 20" ACD (or Dell display if your really tight ;) )

Or a soulless moron.

gauchogolfer
Apr 7, 2006, 02:32 PM
I'd just like to express my happiness at seeing a 'real' Mac rumor at the top of page 1. Just like old times!

but, an intel iBook would be great for my wife, even if she doesn't realize it yet :rolleyes:

bill4588
Apr 7, 2006, 02:33 PM
yeah with all the features that are expected to be included, i wouldnt be surprised if the price started at $1199 :( My price limit is 1000.....so i hope apple does the right thing....

Brundlefly
Apr 7, 2006, 02:34 PM
"said to share internal components"

Integrated graphics? Ugh.

I was playing on a single core mac mini, and I noticed zero lag, so although you wont be able to do any high rez gaming (like you could on the old ibook..snarf) it worked really well...even supporting core image.

BlizzardBomb
Apr 7, 2006, 02:35 PM
In bold, how much I think the items you listed cost :)

As far as that pricing scheme goes, I think it's a little bit too low as the current G4 offerings are at $999 and $1299. Also, one has to take into account the added iSight (About $10, think of camera phones ;)), MagSafe ($25?), remote ($15), etc. Probably not much when the cost is spread out, but it has to add up somewhere. And those Core Duo processors (Well probably about $150 - $200 each for Apple.) still ain't cheap! ;)

True, but Boot Camp means that people from the PC world will be looking into buying a MacBook. It needs to be priced competitively. And the $1299 offering includes a larger screen, TS and AppleInsider say there will only be one 13.3" model.

Eidorian
Apr 7, 2006, 02:35 PM
I was playing on a single core mac mini, and I noticed zero lag, so although you wont be able to do any high rez gaming (like you could on the old ibook..snarf) it worked really well...even supporting core image.What game(s) were you playing?

cwedl
Apr 7, 2006, 02:37 PM
I agree, they've still got the Imac so I dont see why they couldn't keep iBook.

steve said they want the mac name in their products, imac macbook but not iBook

deadturtle
Apr 7, 2006, 02:37 PM
As someone who worked in Apple Education, the $$ is very important. We sold far more 12 inch iBook's because the price point was only three digits. If Apple wants to keep their laptops in the educational sector the bottom of the barrel has to be under a grand. As it is the price bump from 500 to 600 has had a significant shift in attitude here at work. My boss had no troubles slamming down $1000 for two mini's last year this time. Now he looks at it and says $600? Eeeek! Its all in the mind, but a 5 looks alot smaller than a 6, just as $999 looks much less that $1199.

As far as this whole onboard video thing goes, Apple may not have much to say in the matter. Intel may have said we'll supply chips, but you have to use this graphics card. Secondly because is Apple designing their own motherboards anymore? If they are it wouldnt be too hard to solder on a dedicated graphics option, but if they are using pre-fab boards (you know those ITX boards, which come with SATA and IDE and 1gb DDR, VIA makes one somewheres) they may only have to option to firmware the bits out, like the EFI firmware and the PCI bridge to the blue tooth and airport. The video/RAM/North-South Bridge, PCI BUS and (S)ATA interface may all be part of the package and apple is just going to have work around those limitations. I hope that is not the case, but the rumors say ASUSTEK is making the new iBook. If that is the case it is far more cost effective to use an ASUSTEK mb, with whatever pressed components exist (GMA950) whatever and slap an Apple Firmware on it and slot it into a 'Designed by Apple in California (Cuerpotino. which I cant spell) case that was made in Taiwan by Timmy the Slave Child and call it done. Saves Apple some price overhead, but doesnt leave much room for out-board graphics. Apple will then assume if its good enough for core graphics its good enough for us. Apple reputation takes a bit of a hit from the die-hard mac users but the general market share goes up, which is where Apple is really trying to get in all this, no?

boncellis
Apr 7, 2006, 02:38 PM
True, but Boot Camp means that people from the PC world will be looking into buying a MacBook. It needs to be priced competitively.

Not to hijack the thread, but I sure hope you're right! ;)

lmalave
Apr 7, 2006, 02:39 PM
Hmm...it sounds as if this MacBook is going to run at least $1300. I'm sure it will still be a great value at that price, but the point is that they would be abandoning that magic $1000 price point. In the long run, I hope the price comes down and they are able to offer a stripped-down MacBook for $999.

Chrispy
Apr 7, 2006, 02:40 PM
Integrated esp Intel ones are a little tricky ... on paper GM900/950 have better (twice the pipelines etc) than x200 (IGP) or heck even x300 (lowend, almost the same as x200 just not IGP). But you can play all games with x300 and x200 but most of the new games will not be playable on intel IGPs. So you might want to watch out! I think the IGP/Dedicated graphics is going to be the way to up-sell more 'pro' stuff.

Agreed! I have an x300 and while it is not great it is much better than integrated. If these new MacBooks have integrated graphics it will push me away from buying one. I hope they don't go that route but I have a feeling they will :(

BlizzardBomb
Apr 7, 2006, 02:42 PM
Not to hijack the thread, but I sure hope you're right! ;)

I wouldn't be surprized if I was wrong after all :p ;)

Bubbasteve
Apr 7, 2006, 02:45 PM
For the sake of my money, I hope the macbooks dont come with core duo standard

Rod Rod
Apr 7, 2006, 02:46 PM
FWIW, AppleInsider today doesn't expect a Core Solo laptop, only Duos. (I'm skeptical--having an offering on the low-end makes sense to me.)

http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1659
Dell sells a Core Duo laptop for $899. An Apple laptop with a Core Duo for $999 next month is just within reason.

Dell Latitude D620 ($899 Dell Business catalog price, claimed regular price $1179): Core Duo T2300 (1.66GHz, 2MB cache, 667MHz FSB), 512MB shared DDR2 SDRAM, 40GB HDD, 14.1" widescreen XGA, Intel 950 integrated graphics, CD-ROM, 802.11b/g built in).

The Mac would add an Apple Remote, integrated iSight, Bluetooth 2.0 and a Combo drive as far as basic specs go, and the screen would be distinct as well.

amac4me
Apr 7, 2006, 02:46 PM
I would expect the 17" model to be very popular as it it would finally let Mac users have a laptop that is closer in computing power to a desktop than the previous PowerBooks.

My view is that over the past few years, many Mac users have opted to purhase iMacs over PowerBooks becauese of the difficulty in getting a G5 into a portable. Having said that, Those who need laptop that can also perform like a desktop (size and power) will not hesitate to purchase a 17" MacBook Pro

dongmin
Apr 7, 2006, 02:48 PM
I see your point, especially when you consider all the excitement and attention Apple is receiving over the Boot Camp functionality--maybe keeping the G4s around would cause confusion (or even a backlash) among consumers who want to switch but are unfamiliar with the PPC architecture.

As far as that pricing scheme goes, I think it's a little bit too low as the current G4 offerings are at $999 and $1299. Also, one has to take into account the added iSight, MagSafe, remote, etc. Probably not much when the cost is spread out, but it has to add up somewhere. And those Core Duo processors still ain't cheap! ;)The one thing we have going for us, in getting a $999 Apple laptop, is that PC Core Duo laptops can be had for $799. Yes, they don't come with any of the extra hardware and software as you've noted, but Apple will feel some pressure to compete in this price range, especially in the education market.

G4s are, for sure, EOLed. The new MacBooks will require a new mobo to accomodate the new features (IR, iSight, etc.); Apple is not gonna cook up a separate motherboard with the new features AND G4. New MacBooks WILL be 100% Intel, you can bet on it. Apple might sell a few iBooks to blow through the existing stock, but that's about it.

macgeek2005
Apr 7, 2006, 02:49 PM
Please Jobs PLEASE Let it not have integrated graphics!!!!! FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, PLEEEAAAASSSSEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yeah, but otherwise they sound like something I would run to get immedietaly.

I would easily pay $1399 for:

1.67GHz Intel Core Duo
512mb of ram (expandable to 1.5GB)
80GB Hard drive
ATI Radeon X1300/64mb

or something like that. Please JOBS!!! Don't let me down!! Give the high end macbook a video card!!!

Demon Hunter
Apr 7, 2006, 03:00 PM
jus when i had made up my mind to stop waiting for the rumored macbook and go get a 12" pb....this is gonna drive me crazy again...:eek: dont know how long it'll continue..

The 12-inch, surprisingly, still holds advantages. Firstly, the MacBook won't have the "pro" look. If it gets GMA 950, that's really sad because then it's inferior to old PowerBooks. If you don't like widescreen, you're out of luck. If it retains the iBook keyboard, that's also a miss.

You better hope for a striking design and a thin enclosure. :p

nsjoker
Apr 7, 2006, 03:00 PM
i don't like all this change :mad: . the whole "mac" renaming of the products stinks. even steve prefers the name powerbook as demonstrated in that special event. boot camp dual booting windows is a bad idea IMO... i really think it'll take the other route, the one where developers decide to not port to OS X. the intel chips are a welcome change, but the integrated graphics have to go. one of the reasons i love apple is because they always used to have a dedicated chip for graphics in each of their computers :mad: . it's also really annoying seeing them focus like 70% of their attention to the stupid iPod. i dunno, it seems that apple is now the 800 lb gorilla and it blows.

macgeek2005
Apr 7, 2006, 03:08 PM
Do we know for sure that all the MacBook's will have integrated graphics?

Demon Hunter
Apr 7, 2006, 03:09 PM
i don't like all this change :mad: . the whole "mac" renaming of the products stinks. even steve prefers the name powerbook as demonstrated in that special event. boot camp dual booting windows is a bad idea IMO... i really think it'll take the other route, the one where developers decide to not port to OS X. the intel chips are a welcome change, but the integrated graphics have to go. one of the reasons i love apple is because they always used to have a dedicated chip for graphics in each of their computers :mad: . it's also really annoying seeing them focus like 70% of their attention to the stupid iPod. i dunno, it seems that apple is now the 800 lb gorilla and it blows.

The problem is, consumers aren't attributing the Macintosh brand with hits like the iPod. They're idiots.

It would be much worse if they dropped "Mac" in its entirety. Oh, that's too horrible to even think about.

MacRumorsReader
Apr 7, 2006, 03:10 PM
Okay.. So I'm-a-gonna wait to buy. But, if this thing has integrated graphics and/or less than 128mb VRAM, I'm getting a MBP.

mrichmon
Apr 7, 2006, 03:12 PM
I use a 12" Powerbook as my sole computer for Photoshop and significant design work - integrated graphics would be a no-go for me. I want a small but very powerful laptop. At the office I am always using an external monitor and my laptop screen for menus or other applications, not having this option would be a deal killer.

For what you describe (photoshop and design work -- I assume illustrator, indesign, quark, etc) then you are not doing anything that would benefit from a dedicated graphics card?

Current generation integrated graphics chips do accelerated 2D graphics very well and light to moderate 3D acceleration very well. Photoshop, inDesign, Illustrator, Quark, etc are use 2D graphics from the perspective of the graphics chip.

g.x
Apr 7, 2006, 03:24 PM
One more thing, I would have named it the iBook HD. >_>

In a very refreshing way, Apple has high standards for HD. Unlike many manufacturers, they don't call something HD just because it can play some HD resolution out there (720p or 1080i).

Apple only calls something HD if it can play ALL HD resolutions out there. In other words, according to Apple, if it doesn't do 1080p, then it's not HD.

That's why the 20" display and iMac are not called HD by Apple...even though they will certainly do 720p.

Surreal
Apr 7, 2006, 03:24 PM
speaking of graphics, i want a X1800 in that new 17". pronto.

i would consider paying...200-300 more for it as a BTO option.

Random Passerby
Apr 7, 2006, 03:25 PM
But what I WANT is a 12" MBP!
It seems like such a bad move from apple to cut out the pros who want a portable machine. I hope it isn't true.

MacRumorsReader
Apr 7, 2006, 03:25 PM
Mark my words! (hey this is a rumor site)

The macBook will be the status symbol on campuses, everywhere.

"Dude is that a MacBook?"
Oh Yeah
"And you can fire up XP on it?"
Oh Yeah. But I don't need it much
"Man I gotta get me one of those."

hd78
Apr 7, 2006, 03:27 PM
hopefully they put a better screen in the new iBook replacement. The current iBook's screen and brightness is pathetic even compare to a cheap $499 laptop.

minipri
Apr 7, 2006, 03:27 PM
In Windows, a Radeon 9200 can run Star Wars Battlefront. The current iBook has a Radeon 9550. It may not be the most modern card but it's enough to play many/most modern PC games on lower settings.

I'm sorry, but the GMA 950 is a *downgrade*. Consumers want to play casual games too. We're not talking Half-Life 2 at max settings here. Consumers will play at 640x480 if it just runs.

Maybe you're (Originally Posted by dr_lhasick) of people complaining about it, but I'm sick of the apologists that keep saying, "Oh, you want to play casual games? Go spend twice as much on a pro machine! I don't care if you don't have that much money!". I can build a $400 PC with a Geforce FX 5200 that can play games the Mac Mini won't run. I want the iBook to be able to because I can't upgrade it at a later point.

Right on! We (Apple buyers) ...we pay more! We want more! ...more then the Dell-buying PC dude's I mean. ...listen to your people Apple. Just listen.

[ dim. ]

g.x
Apr 7, 2006, 03:27 PM
my G3 iBook has [a] dedicated 32 MB video card

My iBook G3 600 only has 8 MB of video RAM. :(

lduncan
Apr 7, 2006, 03:27 PM
I'm still waiting for my Macbook Pro to arrive! I ordered the day it was announced at MacWorld.

Apple Australia has a lot to answer for!! Surely sending a few dozen MacBook Pros to New Zealand is not a big ask?

theBB
Apr 7, 2006, 03:28 PM
Okay.. So I'm-a-gonna wait to buy. But, if this thing has integrated graphics and/or less than 128mb VRAM, I'm getting a MBP.
You might as well order your MBP now.

I cannot believe you people. You flame Apple for not offering cheap, barebones systems to increase market share. Yet, when Apple offers entry level desktops and laptops with integrated graphics to keep prices down, you freak out. You demand a desktop below $500 or a laptop under $1000, yet you think Core Solo is useless. If anything, Apple is not going far enough, they should drop nice features such as iSight, remote etc that a lot of people may not be able to afford and offer a really entry-level model.

BTW, if you use Photoshop, the card that comes with mini seems powerful enough. I also remember reading somewhere that Adobe software does not utilize graphics cards much anyways (I guess, in order to avoid tweaking their code for all those grahics chips out there.) For all those freaking out over this issue, I am yet to see any PC under $600 that has a Core Duo, DVD writer and a dedicated graphics card along with 802.11b/g. I am not even going into the size and the "looks."

pjkelnhofer
Apr 7, 2006, 03:31 PM
So, I was trying to convince a friend to buy a MacBook Pro for college. And one of the benefits (as I explained to him) is that once he buys a MacBook Pro he can check MacRumors every hour to see when the next Macbook Pro is coming out.

Lo and behold, I go to MacRumors and see a 5-minute old post about updated MacBook Pros (and MacBooks).

So many reasons to buy one.

You don't need to check MacRumors to find that out. Just always assume that the next version is coming out "Next Tuesday". Like the PowerBook G5s!

MacRumorsReader
Apr 7, 2006, 03:32 PM
You might as well order your MBP now.

I cannot believe you people. You flame Apple for not offering cheap, barebones systems to increase market share. Yet, when Apple offers entry level desktops and laptops with integrated graphics to keep prices down, you freak out. You demand a desktop below $500 or a laptop under $1000, yet you think Core Solo is useless and integrated graphics chip is junk. If anything, Apple is not going far enough, they should drop nice features such as iSight, remote etc that a lot of people may not be able to afford and offer a really entry-level model.

BTW, if you use Photoshop, GMA900 seems powerful enough. I also remember reading somewhere that Adobe software does not utilize graphics cards much anyways (I guess, in order to avoid tweaking their code for all those grahics chips out there.) For all those freaking out over this issue, I am yet to see any PC under $600 that has a Core Duo, DVD writer and a dedicated graphics card along with 802.11b/g. I am not even going into the size and the "looks."
Don't worry about me. I'll pay for it. I'll pay the (preceived) Apple premium. I just like the form factor of my 12" PB. If they make the high end MacBook perform like the MBP but smaller, I'm all over it.

Otherwise, I'll get the 15.4" MBP because 17" just seems HUGE.

Then, come Christmas, I'm hoping Apple has a nice present for me to buy for myself.

dr_lha
Apr 7, 2006, 03:39 PM
In Windows, a Radeon 9200 can run Star Wars Battlefront. The current iBook has a Radeon 9550. It may not be the most modern card but it's enough to play many/most modern PC games on lower settings.

I'm sorry, but the GMA 950 is a *downgrade*. Consumers want to play casual games too. We're not talking Half-Life 2 at max settings here. Consumers will play at 640x480 if it just runs.

Maybe you're sick of people complaining about it, but I'm sick of the apologists that keep saying, "Oh, you want to play casual games? Go spend twice as much on a pro machine! I don't care if you don't have that much money!". I can build a $400 PC with a Geforce FX 5200 that can play games the Mac Mini won't run. I want the iBook to be able to because I can't upgrade it at a later point.
Show me the evidence that that GMA950 can't play Star Wars Battlefront at 640x480. From what I've read the Mini does a decent job at World of Warcraft. E.g.:

http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/games/mac_wow_performance.html

One guy there reports 12FPS, but at a whopping 1920x1080, so I imagine at 640x480 it runs like a charm.

I still think you're overestimating the number of people who play games on their iBooks. Personally I know a bunch of students with iBooks (including my wife) and the Sudoku widget is about as far as it goes.

Demon Hunter
Apr 7, 2006, 03:41 PM
In a very refreshing way, Apple has high standards for HD. Unlike many manufacturers, they don't call something HD just because it can play some HD resolution out there (720p or 1080i).

Apple only calls something HD if it can play ALL HD resolutions out there. In other words, according to Apple, if it doesn't do 1080p, then it's not HD.

That's why the 20" display and iMac are not called HD by Apple...even though they will certainly do 720p.

Or they just want HD customers to pay more. :p

A 19-inch MacBook Pro would be sweet. But a third of your arm would be reaching for the keyboard.

KindredMAC
Apr 7, 2006, 03:42 PM
So help me God if they don't make a $999 model or cheaper!!!!!!

Demon Hunter
Apr 7, 2006, 03:43 PM
Show me the evidence that that GMA950 can't play Star Wars Battlefront at 640x480. From what I've read the Mini does a decent job at World of Warcraft. E.g.:

http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/games/mac_wow_performance.html

One guy there reports 12FPS, but at a whopping 1920x1080, so I imagine at 640x480 it runs like a charm.

I still think you're overestimating the number of people who play games on their iBooks. Personally I know a bunch of students with iBooks (including my wife) and the Sudoku widget is about as far as it goes.

World of Warcraft is a poor example. That game was designed to run on the most meagre of setups. It runs on machines below 1GHz.

milo
Apr 7, 2006, 03:43 PM
I think it is a bad idea to rename the ibook to MacBook. There is not enough difference between MacBook Pro. People will get confused. Plus, the name iBook is so well known now, to change it doesn't make any sense.

Macbook is the one that is smaller and cheaper. What's to confuse? And being well known didn't stop them from dumping powerbook. "iBook" doesn't have "mac" in it. Game over. Give it a rest already.

should we expect a "MacPod" soon.

Let's see. Is the iBook a mac? Yes. Is the iPod a mac? No. Mac is a kind of computer. Apple is the brand name of the company. Any other questions?

I think people will forgive the MacBook name when they see how the new machines tear the old G4's a new one. Just like they did with the MBP.

now theres a big plus and 720p is about all the low core solos and low core duos can manage its only the >1.8 that seem to manage 1080p

It's been said, but it's worth repeating. The duos handle 1080 just fine. And the integrated video on the minis is fine as well, it works great for everything but high end games, and nobody expects a budget laptop to be a gaming powerhouse. I'd much rather see them keep the price down than add a graphics card.

macpastor
Apr 7, 2006, 03:45 PM
1280x720 (16:9) is an odd resolution for Apple who prefers to use 16:10. I thought they'd go for 1280x800.


Making room for the iSight, just like the MBP?

dr_lha
Apr 7, 2006, 03:46 PM
World of Warcraft is a poor example. That game was designed to run on the most meagre of setups. It runs on machines below 1GHz.
Fair enough. How about this page:

http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.php?t=287515

In a PC at least, the GMA950 can run Half Life 2 at between 20-25 FPS. This directly goes against the assertion that the GMA950 "won't run" these games as GFLPraxis states.

milo
Apr 7, 2006, 03:55 PM
I use a 12" Powerbook as my sole computer for Photoshop and significant design work - integrated graphics would be a no-go for me. I want a small but very powerful laptop.

Why? For photoshop, integrated graphics don't give you anything. All they improve is realtime 3d. What part of photoshop needs realtime 3d acceleration?

Note that "integrated video" doesn't imply no dual monitor support? Or am I missing something?

Consumers want to play casual games too. We're not talking Half-Life 2 at max settings here. Consumers will play at 640x480 if it just runs.

Sounds like you're describing the mini. What "casual games" are you under the impression won't run on a mini?

macpastor
Apr 7, 2006, 03:55 PM
But what I WANT is a 12" MBP!
It seems like such a bad move from apple to cut out the pros who want a portable machine. I hope it isn't true.

I had a 12" Powerbook... it never was in the same class as the 15" and 17" I think it was less pro than the other two. It seems right to combine the iBook and the 12" PB and give a grand computer! I only hope they go with aluminum and not the plastic crap. The iBook always mars, and looks terrible, in my opinion. What could be even better than that? A choice of colors, just like the iPod mini. How cool would that be?

Moshiiii
Apr 7, 2006, 03:57 PM
Could somone explain to me what Integrated Graphics are?

dr_lha
Apr 7, 2006, 03:57 PM
I had a 12" Powerbook... it never was in the same class as the 15" and 17" I think it was less pro than the other two.
I hear this opinion all the time on Mac sites. In what way was the 12" less pro than the other two. The only reason I can think is that it's languished for a long time without being upgraded.

However when it first came out, I think you have a difficult time arguing it wasn't a pro machine.

dr_lha
Apr 7, 2006, 03:58 PM
Could somone explain to me what Integrated Graphics are?
Something that makes people go bat**** insane on Mac forums. ;)

kahos
Apr 7, 2006, 03:59 PM
Fair enough. How about this page:

http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.php?t=287515

In a PC at least, the GMA950 can run Half Life 2 at between 20-25 FPS. This directly goes against the assertion that the GMA950 "won't run" these games as GFLPraxis states.

It might be because I used to be an "hardcore" pc gamer, but I believe you have very low standards to call a came running at 20 fps playable, especially since its a FPS.

Tymmz
Apr 7, 2006, 04:00 PM
*waits for 10.5 first*

Seriously, I bought iLife '06 and that's the most updating I'll do. I'll just wait for iLife '07 and 10.5 to come standard on whatever new Mac I pick. Still, the more revisions before then the better. Bring them out sooner!

Same here. I'll wait till 10.5.3 or so, then I'll check for new Hardware.

dr_lha
Apr 7, 2006, 04:02 PM
It might be because I used to be an "hardcore" pc gamer, but I believe you have very low standards to call a came running at 20 fps playable, especially since its a FPS.
I don't think the Mac mini is supposed to be a games machine like some others.

I'm just contesting the idea that the Mac mini won't even run these games as some have said here.

Casual gamers will find 20-25fps fine for FPS games IMHO. If not they should damn well go out and buy a gaming PC.

Shaker
Apr 7, 2006, 04:11 PM
Show me the evidence that that GMA950 can't play Star Wars Battlefront at 640x480. From what I've read the Mini does a decent job at World of Warcraft. E.g.:

http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/games/mac_wow_performance.html

One guy there reports 12FPS, but at a whopping 1920x1080, so I imagine at 640x480 it runs like a charm.

I still think you're overestimating the number of people who play games on their iBooks. Personally I know a bunch of students with iBooks (including my wife) and the Sudoku widget is about as far as it goes.

But now win XP on the mac, you will be able to play just about anything that the hardware can handle.

BenRoethig
Apr 7, 2006, 04:19 PM
Great on the specs, a tad late on the timeframe.

boncellis
Apr 7, 2006, 04:20 PM
The one thing we have going for us, in getting a $999 Apple laptop, is that PC Core Duo laptops can be had for $799. Yes, they don't come with any of the extra hardware and software as you've noted, but Apple will feel some pressure to compete in this price range, especially in the education market.

G4s are, for sure, EOLed. The new MacBooks will require a new mobo to accomodate the new features (IR, iSight, etc.); Apple is not gonna cook up a separate motherboard with the new features AND G4. New MacBooks WILL be 100% Intel, you can bet on it. Apple might sell a few iBooks to blow through the existing stock, but that's about it.

You said it, I agree 100%. Another thing to consider is that the G4 iBook is already at $999 and $1299, so it would be very hard (but not impossible) for me to see Apple lowering the pricepoint for the Intel counterparts. That said, I sure hope they do. Their status has to be worth something, wouldn't you agree?

weldon
Apr 7, 2006, 04:20 PM
I think we can bank on integrated graphics considering that Dell's laptop offerings in the $900-1000 price range have integrated graphics. Personally, I think this is just fine because it will be more important for Apple to hit the right price points on the MacBook than it will be to have the best graphics performance.

gnasher729
Apr 7, 2006, 04:23 PM
Dell sells a Core Duo laptop for $899. An Apple laptop with a Core Duo for $999 next month is just within reason.

Dell Latitude D620 ($899 Dell Business catalog price, claimed regular price $1179): Core Duo T2300 (1.66GHz, 2MB cache, 667MHz FSB), 512MB shared DDR2 SDRAM, 40GB HDD, 14.1" widescreen XGA, Intel 950 integrated graphics, CD-ROM, 802.11b/g built in).

Typical Dell. I checked the home user department. A Core Duo laptop is slightly under $1000; but once you add Windows XP Pro (nowhere near MacOS X), the entertainment package (nowhere near iLife), Bluetooth, and a two year antivirus subscription (don't need that on the Mac), you are more at $1300. All that after 25% rebate; more than $1600 regular price. Anyone here with experience how difficult it is to actually get that rebate?

alfismoney
Apr 7, 2006, 04:23 PM
two distant MacBook 13" prayers; support for at least 2 gigs of ram and a good dvi driver for external displays. i don't need a killer processor and don't want a 15" screen but i do like to have enough ram to bust through a photoshop doc or a FCP project when I need to. 1280x720 makes for a great little portable (much better than my tibook), i just want to be able to whip out a bluetooth keyboard/mouse and plug into the 1920x1200 display on my desk when i get back home. my laptop is deader than dead and i really want to replace my G5 with a decent external hard disk and something mid-sized i can carry around.

on a side note, i'm sorry but the constant talk about video games is getting absurd. i pray for the day the macbook hits the market so i don't have to scan through 15 pages about Open GL, on board graphics, ati versus nvidia, and graphics acceleration in order to figure out whether the MacBook might suppoort a feature a non-gamer might want. i appreciate how exciting it is to be able to run a video game on your intel mac but i can't believe how much buzz this is generating. maybe you folks should've gotten together back in the day and put in a competitive bid to stop microsoft from buying bungie.

Tupring
Apr 7, 2006, 04:26 PM
1280x720 (16:9) is an odd resolution for Apple who prefers to use 16:10. I thought they'd go for 1280x800.Yeah, you'd think so. But then again, Apple makes Intel PCs now.

alfismoney
Apr 7, 2006, 04:26 PM
Typical Dell. I checked the home user department. A Core Duo laptop is slightly under $1000; but once you add Windows XP Pro (nowhere near MacOS X), the entertainment package (nowhere near iLife), Bluetooth, and a two year antivirus subscription (don't need that on the Mac), you are more at $1300. All that after 25% rebate; more than $1600 regular price. Anyone here with experience how difficult it is to actually get that rebate?

Dell's rebates work pretty well, six to eight weeks later you have a check with your name on it. Their tech support, on the other hand, is happy to transfer you to five different departments in three different countries to troubleshoot the fact that they shipped you an un-refurbished refurbished printer out of the warehouse by accident. Thanks, Dell, for making my home office that much harder to set up.

Moshiiii
Apr 7, 2006, 04:27 PM
Alot of people are upset about Integrated Graphics but yet no one can explain what means.

Demon Hunter
Apr 7, 2006, 04:30 PM
Fair enough. How about this page:

http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.php?t=287515

In a PC at least, the GMA950 can run Half Life 2 at between 20-25 FPS. This directly goes against the assertion that the GMA950 "won't run" these games as GFLPraxis states.

Oh I'm sure they'll run, definitely. GMA 950 uses PCIe and the latest shaders.

But the sad truth is that GMA 950's performance (based on graphics chipset alone) brings us back to October 22, 2003 with the 12" iBook G4/800 and Mobility Radeon 9200. Adding insult to injury, the 9200 actually performs better.

Yes, friends... 2003.

JAT
Apr 7, 2006, 04:31 PM
Alot of people are upset about Integrated Graphics but yet no one can explain what means.
It is integrated with the rest of the base system, and the RAM is shared with system RAM. Unlike a graphics card, which is a separate piece of hardware with its own dedicated RAM, even in a laptop.

milo
Apr 7, 2006, 04:32 PM
Alot of people are upset about Integrated Graphics but yet no one can explain what means.

It means the machine has graphics processing on a chip on the motherboard instead of a graphics card in a slot. In most cases, the integrated isn't quite as good, but with the latest ones you'll only see a difference in 3D apps (games).

MacRumorsReader
Apr 7, 2006, 04:33 PM
Alot of people are upset about Integrated Graphics but yet no one can explain what means.

It means that the graphics are integrated. Or in other words that it doesn't have unintegrated graphics.

Better?

What it really means is that if you have 2 GBs of RAM some of that RAM doubles as Video RAM. This number is usually not user selectable and is also, usually very small.

Someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

Moshiiii
Apr 7, 2006, 04:36 PM
Oic thanks! Im glad i bought my MBP then.

gekko513
Apr 7, 2006, 04:43 PM
Core Duo only? Sounds like it will be quite expensive. I'm guessing a price increase to $1099, maybe even $1199.

SaddY
Apr 7, 2006, 04:44 PM
Let me predict the following:

The redesign will sweep you off your feet so whatever they put in it you will want it anyway.

They will not keep the 999 price point.. every intel product they released went up in price. So why wouldn't the macbook ?

People screeming for a core duo and hating on integrated graphics and want a x1300 or x1600 in and want to keep the price point should stop dreaming..
The only duo's as far as I know are 1,66 1,83 2.0 and 2.16 ghz.
We know the macbook's come in 1,83 an 2.0 with option for 2.16.. so there could only be a 1,66 used in the macbooks to not exceed the macbook pro's...

A 1.66 Core Duo with X1600 would just be way to close to the MBP.. so either expect the price to be close to 1999 or don't expect those specs

I as a MacBook Pro owner (just upgraded from a latest gen iBook G4) feel that at a 999 price point you should not expect more then a intel integrated graphics chip. If you however go for the more expensive model you should be able to count on a dedicated graphics chip. Maybe they have alot of spare 9700 stock :P

I don't know..
but I forcast not to big of a deal.. The Macbook pro's can't be upgraded anymore (only make the 2.16 a standard instead of BTO) untill the Memrom comes out which will be at the end of the year early next year. So neither can the Macbooks. So they WILL start at a core solo low end and core duo 1.66 high end.

So to sum it up

MBP : 1,83 and 2.0 ---> upgrade 2.16
MB : 1.5 1.66 --> upgrade 1.83 when MBP's upgrade

That only seems logical to me :S
And yes I do think they will have integrated graphics..

Don't really get the 17 inch MBP hype. The specs will be the same as the MBP obviously except for some slight changes. (the CPU, Ram and HD will be the same atleast). Why do you want such a huge thing ? just get the 15 inch and hook it up to external if you want bigger imho..

thats just my 2 cents..

dr_lha
Apr 7, 2006, 04:46 PM
Oh I'm sure they'll run, definitely. GMA 950 uses PCIe and the latest shaders.

But the sad truth is that GMA 950's performance (based on graphics chipset alone) brings us back to October 22, 2003 with the 12" iBook G4/800 and Mobility Radeon 9200. Adding insult to injury, the 9200 actually performs better.

Yes, friends... 2003.
For 3D maybe, but the GMA 950 pushes pixels around better than the 9200 does, so for user interface and stuff like Movies its great.

theBB
Apr 7, 2006, 04:46 PM
Anyone here with experience how difficult it is to actually get that rebate?
My last rebate never arrived. It was only for $15 and I was too busy to call them and stay on hold at the time. Now it is too late. I know a lot of people who had no problems, but still it is not perfect. Why don't they just offer a limited time discount? It is their own website, it is not like we are buying it through some middlemen such as Best Buy or Circuit City. They could easily do it. They are just hoping you'd miss the deadline or they would make a mistake (!) and you'd be too busy to look into it.

What gets me is Dell's tricks with prices. Every now and then, there is a really good deal and I think I'll just add a DVD writer for $50, the rest I could live with, but then the rebate dissapears, because is either the rebate or customization. All of a sudden that DVD writer is costing me $250. Besides, they have free shipping, but charge $60 for handling. Give me a break...

I prefer HP/Compaq. On their site, I can also find out the number of Firewire and USB ports or screen resolution without going through a lot of web pages. If Dell prefers to hide details, it is a good bet they'd rather you don't know.

milo
Apr 7, 2006, 04:48 PM
They will not keep the 999 price point.. every intel product they released went up in price. So why wouldn't the macbook ?

No they didn't. Only the minis went up in price. iMacs were $1299. 15 inch laptops were $1999. Both same as before. I'd say the odds are 50/50 on the MacBook being the same or going up a bit.

Demon Hunter
Apr 7, 2006, 04:48 PM
Don't really get the 17 inch MBP hype. The specs will be the same as the MBP obviously except for some slight changes. (the CPU, Ram and HD will be the same atleast). Why do you want such a huge thing ? just get the 15 inch and hook it up to external if you want bigger imho..

thats just my 2 cents..

We want our FireWire 800 back. :mad:

ready2switch
Apr 7, 2006, 04:48 PM
What is so bad about wanting dedicated graphics on a “consumer” laptop? Or a Core Duo? Or any of the other *hopes* listed? IMO there is a reachable and reasonable solution:

MacBook – Low option (think mini with a screen)
1.5 (or 1.66) Core Solo
512MB memory
60GB hard drive
Combo Drive
Airport Extreme/Bluetooth/Remote/iSight
Intel GMA950 graphics

BTO Options:
1.66 Core Duo
up to 2GB memory
up to 120GB hard drive
Super Drive
dedicated graphics (64MB or 128MB)

Standard “Low option” priced @ $999
Options bump price as desired.

I don’t think it’s out of reach, and would be in line with some other available counterparts in the PC world. I, for one, would be more than willing to pay for the options I want. Those wanting dedicated graphics aren't wanting them for free, just as an OPTION.

dr_lha
Apr 7, 2006, 04:50 PM
What is so bad about wanting dedicated graphics on a “consumer” laptop? Or a Core Duo? Or any of the other *hopes* listed? IMO there is a reachable and reasonable solution:

MacBook – Low option (think mini with a screen)
1.5 (or 1.66) Core Solo
512MB memory
60GB hard drive
Combo Drive
Airport Extreme/Bluetooth/Remote/iSight
Intel GMA950 graphics

BTO Options:
1.66 Core Duo
up to 2GB memory
up to 120GB hard drive
Super Drive
dedicated graphics (64MB or 128MB)

Standard “Low option” priced @ $999
Options bump price as desired.

I don’t think it’s out of reach, and would be in line with some other available counterparts in the PC world. I, for one, would be more than willing to pay for the options I want. Those wanting dedicated graphics aren't wanting them for free, just as an OPTION.

Dedicated graphics will not be a BTO option. They'd have to redesign the motherboard to put a GFX chip on the board. Expect dedicated GFX chip to be a rev. B thing when the prices of Core chips go down maybe.

dwsolberg
Apr 7, 2006, 04:51 PM
Appleinsider seems to think Apple can create a dual-core, brilliant 13.3 widescreen, and separate graphics card system for iBook prices. This doesn't make sense: The cheapest MacBook Pro is $1999, about twice as much with pretty similar specs. You can't find a notebook PC with those specs and a $999 price point, and Apples are rarely cheaper than PCs.

Realistically, though, Apple will need to fill in the pricing between the $999 and $1999 price points. It'll be interesting to see what happens.

milo
Apr 7, 2006, 04:52 PM
For 3D maybe, but the GMA 950 pushes pixels around better than the 9200 does, so for user interface and stuff like Movies its great.

Good point. I assume the 2003 iBooks can't play back hi def, can they?

We want our FireWire 800 back. :mad:

Give it up. Never going to happen. I wouldn't be surprised if even the towers don't have it.

What is so bad about wanting dedicated graphics on a “consumer” laptop?

Nothing, except it raises the price. Even if they make in an option, they have to include the slot on the motherboard and leave the space for it on the models that don't include it. Considering they have the duo in one of the minis, I don't think there's any doubt we'll see duos on the higher configs.

Some_Big_Spoon
Apr 7, 2006, 04:53 PM
Me too.. I've said a number of times here that I need a smaller power(mac)book, not a larger one. No attached optical drive please, thanks.

I really do prefer for it to be smaller and even more portable. :o

dejo
Apr 7, 2006, 04:55 PM
But what I WANT is a 12" MBP!
It seems like such a bad move from apple to cut out the pros who want a portable machine. I hope it isn't true.

I didn't realize the MacBook Pros weren't portable... ;)

dr_lha
Apr 7, 2006, 04:56 PM
Good point. I assume the 2003 iBooks can't play back hi def, can they?

Not a chance.

milo
Apr 7, 2006, 04:56 PM
Appleinsider seems to think Apple can create a dual-core, brilliant 13.3 widescreen, and separate graphics card system for iBook prices. This doesn't make sense: The cheapest MacBook Pro is $1999, about twice as much with pretty similar specs. You can't find a notebook PC with those specs and a $999 price point, and Apples are rarely cheaper than PCs.

Actually, AI makes no mention of graphics implementation. And they don't mention pricing either, so they're not saying to expect $999.

Me too.. I've said a number of times here that I need a smaller power(mac)book, not a larger one. No attached optical drive please, thanks.

They might do that, but it would be a third model of laptop (macbook mini), not a replacement for the ibook.

MrCrowbar
Apr 7, 2006, 05:03 PM
Here's what I want:

12" to 13.3" form factor
Core Duo
128MB dedicated grahpixs
SuperDrive
High quality keyboard like in the powerbooks
Ability to drive a big screen via DVI
Decent case (not ugly plastic)


I need something small that I can toss in any backpack so people don't "woo, he's carrying a notebook". I would buy the MBP if it just were smaller.


Besides, most people that bought the 12" powerbook did care less about the price than about the size. But Apple's actual approach seems "small = consumer, big = professional". I don't care too much for the price (hey, I'm buying an apple product. hellloooo?), I just need a computer I can carry around all day.

PLEASE, APPLE, MAKE A 12" MACBOOK PRO!



Let's all send e-mails to Apple askinf for a 12" MBP.

plarusa
Apr 7, 2006, 05:04 PM
I was hoping to one day replace my 12" Powerbook with a 12" Macbook. I guess this won't happen if this rumor turns out to be true. I will probably keep the Powerbook and go for the G5 replacement when available.

milo
Apr 7, 2006, 05:05 PM
Besides, most people that bought the 12" powerbook did care less about the price than about the size. But Apple's actual approach seems "small = consumer, big = professional". I don't care too much for the price (hey, I'm buying an apple product. hellloooo?), I just need a computer I can carry around all day.

PLEASE, APPLE, MAKE A 12" MACBOOK PRO!

Sounds like the models they're predicting may have everything you want except for a graphics card. What pro apps are you running that need one?

I was hoping to one day replace my 12" Powerbook with a 12" Macbook. I guess this won't happen if this rumor turns out to be true. I will probably keep the Powerbook and go for the G5 replacement when available.

There will never be a G5 powerbook. Period. I doubt we'll see ANY upgrades to any of the PPC macs before they're discontinued.

MacMosher
Apr 7, 2006, 05:10 PM
Since its a replacement for the iBook AND the powerbook, there should be multiple colors, or just only aluminium...
That would be sweet.;)

plarusa
Apr 7, 2006, 05:10 PM
Sounds like the models they're predicting may have everything you want except for a graphics card. What pro apps are you running that need one?



There will never be a G5 powerbook. Period. I doubt we'll see ANY upgrades to any of the PPC macs before they're discontinued.


I was thinking of the next G5 desktop replacement (what ever that turns out to be).

Clydefrog
Apr 7, 2006, 05:10 PM
They should make a 12in before the 17 or release them at the same time :(

I want my 12in/13in MBP :'(

milo
Apr 7, 2006, 05:11 PM
I was thinking of the next G5 desktop replacement (what ever that turns out to be).

Sorry, I misunderstood.

SuperSnake2012
Apr 7, 2006, 05:12 PM
^ I'm pretty sure he's referring to the Intel iMacs.

I just hope that there is some sort of video card. :eek:

boncellis
Apr 7, 2006, 05:30 PM
I was thinking of the next G5 desktop replacement (what ever that turns out to be).

I'm in the same boat. From what I've heard the current MBP 2.0 and 2.16 are more than capable of replacing a desktop, though perhaps not on the level with the Quad G5 Powermac. Still, they are great machines.

I am excited for the Merom/Conroe unveiling which should happen in the next several months. While Yonah was a good processor for the transition to the x86 architecture, all reports are that Merom and Conroe are the stars in the making. A Merom Mac Mini (try saying that one 3x times fast) is something I'll take a long look at, and the MBP version will be that much better, I imagine.

The question in my mind is, with the quasi-merging of the notebook lines, will "Pro" denote Merom and the iBook replacement hold onto Yonah with only certain upgrades (speed bumps, etc.)?

paddy
Apr 7, 2006, 05:31 PM
I know one thing for certain, if a dedicated graphics chip is not included I wont buy a macbook. Is it really that unreasonable to expect a decent graphics card (not a top of the range one, just something with maybe 64 or 128 vram)?

All Id want along with many other consumers is to be able to handle the odd shooter or strategy games, not at maxed out settings but at something smooth. Thats not unreasonable at €1029-€1499.

pavetheforest
Apr 7, 2006, 05:32 PM
everyones talking about graphics, which I care about, but can wait to find out integrated/not..........the speculation is getting old anyway. my REAL question is what about sound? I've used my buddy's iBook for garageband in corporation with some of my own equipment, and the sound quality, for a demo, was great. will the sound card in these new intel macs have the same qualities as previous macs? If not, well jeez, i'll buy an old one. help me out, this is really important!!!:eek: (not playback, but recording sound quality)

MacSA
Apr 7, 2006, 05:41 PM
Intel are supposed to be reducing prices on the Core Duo chips next month... so maybe we will see them in the MacBook. However, I still think we will se a Core Solo/Combo Drive version at the low end to cover the iBook and Core Duo/Superdrive at the high end - effectively replacing the 12" Powerbook.

dr_lha
Apr 7, 2006, 05:42 PM
everyones talking about graphics, which I care about, but can wait to find out integrated/not..........the speculation is getting old anyway. my REAL question is what about sound? I've used my buddy's iBook for garageband in corporation with some of my own equipment, and the sound quality, for a demo, was great. will the sound card in these new intel macs have the same qualities as previous macs? If not, well jeez, i'll buy an old one. help me out, this is really important!!!:eek:
Well the new minis have optical in/out, so maybe this will become a standard feature of audio across all Apple lines. As for the quality of the soundcard, I've found that soundcard technology, unlike GFX cards, has pretty much hit a point of diminshing returns.

pavetheforest
Apr 7, 2006, 05:45 PM
Well the new minis have optical in/out, so maybe this will become a standard feature of audio across all Apple lines. As for the quality of the soundcard, I've found that soundcard technology, unlike GFX cards, has pretty much hit a point of diminshing returns.


so do you suggest i wait it out for the new higher-end macbook or jump on an older model ibook/powerbook?

Thanatoast
Apr 7, 2006, 05:48 PM
Is there anything that discounts two models? 13" MB and MBP? One with a Solo and integrated graphics and the other with a Duo and dedicated graphics?

Is Apple concentrating on replacing the 12 PowerBook or the iBook. If the iBook, then hello GMA950. If the PowerBook, then probably a card to match the 15".

Regardless, I'd expect the iBook replacement to sell for 1099 minimum, - just based on what we've seen so far. A more PowerBook oriented replacement would probably go for closer to 1699 or 1799, though.

Of course, my speculation/suggestion is no more valid than anyone's, but I think it takes account of everyone's issues nicely.

manu chao
Apr 7, 2006, 05:50 PM
A decent GPU in a small Core Duo laptop would be especially welcome, though, along with lighted keys.

I really like the backlit keyboard on my Powerbook, and I would not want a Mac without it ... because it looks so elegant and Macs and OS X are all about elegance.
But, beyond this, the backlit keyboard is of no practical use for me at all, it is about useful as the backlit Apple logo behind the screen. As a touch-typer who uses anyway a different layout than the one printed on my keys I look at the screen when typing not at the keyboard.

Learn touch-typing, you are going to enjoy using your computer much more.

BillyShears
Apr 7, 2006, 05:50 PM
Well the new minis have optical in/out, so maybe this will become a standard feature of audio across all Apple lines. As for the quality of the soundcard, I've found that soundcard technology, unlike GFX cards, has pretty much hit a point of diminshing returns.

My understanding of GarageBand and other audio apps is that you typically use an external (USB or Firewire) soundcard to get good sound. For example something from M-Audio. Usually you don't just plug your guitar into the computer. I've yet to do it, so I might be wrong.

bill4588
Apr 7, 2006, 05:52 PM
i hope i dont have to get an iBook G4....but then again i could get a brand new one for cheap....I dont know what I'm gonna do! Apple needs to release more info ASAP....like by next week (tomorrow preferably :p )

goldenhorse
Apr 7, 2006, 05:53 PM
I really hope they plan to offer something in the new pro line that is as compact and portable as the 12" Powerbook. If they don't that would be a major disappointment.

Demon Hunter
Apr 7, 2006, 05:57 PM
Is there anything that discounts two models? 13" MB and MBP? One with a Solo and integrated graphics and the other with a Duo and dedicated graphics?

Is Apple concentrating on replacing the 12 PowerBook or the iBook. If the iBook, then hello GMA950. If the PowerBook, then probably a card to match the 15".

Regardless, I'd expect the iBook replacement to sell for 1099 minimum, - just based on what we've seen so far. A more PowerBook oriented replacement would probably go for closer to 1699 or 1799, though.

Of course, my speculation/suggestion is no more valid than anyone's, but I think it takes account of everyone's issues nicely.

There was far too much confusion about the two models. At times, nothing was even separating them except the aluminum! The 12-inch PowerBook is definitely gone... I would not expect a MBP version.

aswitcher
Apr 7, 2006, 05:58 PM
Key things for me will be -

Decent graphics card - why I wont buy a mini. A 128 would really make this machine attractive

Better battery life - lets hope they have some good news

Backlight keybiard - surely this will become standard for all Apple portable machines one day

Gigabit ethernet - loose firewire but get decent speeds for network HDD storage

Dedicated function keys - surely they can find the space (at least on the 17"?)

802.11N - When are Apple going to introduce this almost finalised standard - they led the way before so why not now (A pro thingy I know)

HMDI (HDCP) out? Maybe 2007 but it would really be nice to see them lead with this stuff. (A pro thingy again - maybe the 17" will get it)

Built in GPS - This has to happen one day (Pro feature again I guess *sigh*)

rickvanr
Apr 7, 2006, 05:59 PM
If the rumours are true.. my income tax return will be put to good use. If it's anything smaller then 1280x 720 I may just hold onto my PB though.

dr_lha
Apr 7, 2006, 05:59 PM
so do you suggest i wait it out for the new higher-end macbook or jump on an older model ibook/powerbook?
Wait for the Macbook. Now is not the time to buy a G4 based Mac!

pavetheforest
Apr 7, 2006, 06:00 PM
My understanding of GarageBand and other audio apps is that you typically use an external (USB or Firewire) soundcard to get good sound. For example something from M-Audio. Usually you don't just plug your guitar into the computer. I've yet to do it, so I might be wrong.

ahh duh, i have an m-audio usb recording device, so i suppose it would make sense that i'm using that sound card, not the internal apple one...so i guess as long as i have the app(garageband) i should be alright?

w_parietti22
Apr 7, 2006, 06:02 PM
Hmmm MacBook or MacBook Pro... I can't decide.

reidster
Apr 7, 2006, 06:02 PM
hopefully they put a better screen in the new iBook replacement. The current iBook's screen and brightness is pathetic even compare to a cheap $499 laptop.

Agreed, the 14" iBook display is disappointing, but the 12" is one of the nicer laptop displays I've worked with. There's a huge difference between the displays, probably because they're both 1024x768. 1280x768 on a 13.3" should be equally nice, because a 13.3" widescreen should be physically the same height as the 12".

That said, here's hoping there's something aluminum, but smaller than the MBP 15, dual core, hopefully with discreet graphics memory.

ipacmm
Apr 7, 2006, 06:11 PM
Can't wait until the 17" MBP comes out and hopefully they will be doing the free iPod deal when it is released.

slffl
Apr 7, 2006, 06:20 PM
Are the only difference between the whole macbook lineup going to be processor speed and display/case size/color?

MacRumorsReader
Apr 7, 2006, 06:38 PM
Why do people keep expecting Apple to bring back FW800?

It isn't Apple's fault that it is gone.

bilbo--baggins
Apr 7, 2006, 06:43 PM
I think they need a bottom of the range model with Core Solo and integrated graphics - the cheapest possible MacBook. Keeping the entry level as low as possible will attract more customers. Even if people end up looking at the specs and decide it's worth paying a little more for the Core Duo, or a model with a decent graphics card, it's that "from $999" or whatever that will catch peoples attention.

Heck, I started out looking at Mac Mini's, then the price tag of the iBook G4 caught my attention, then I started looking at MacBook Pro's. If I'd simply seen the price tag of the MacBook Pro I would have disregarded it as being out of my price range. I even talked myself into getting the 2.0 GHz MacBook Pro, cos when you consider that you're going to need at least 1GB RAM and a 100GB hard drive, to get the 1.83 GHz model with these specs is only slightly cheaper than the 2.0 GHz model that has 1GB and 100GB's as standard. Anyone recognise this scenario? No, just me then? :D

Anawrahta
Apr 7, 2006, 06:43 PM
So no cheap 14 or 15 consumer laptops or what? This is quite a dissapointment hopefully Apple has something instore because I know of several people who are considering new laptops, want them in that size but don't have the money to go for the MacBook Pro.

Also I sure hope they have PB12 replacement instore as an ThinkpadX or a SonyX series killer, I would love to have an Apple ultra portable like the old Duo days.

wingsky
Apr 7, 2006, 06:44 PM
Even though my iBook is less than a year old (purchased July 05), I will definitely be getting one of these!

integrated graphics are fine for what i need.... yessss excel spreadsheets in widescreen (^_^)v

dannyhawaii
Apr 7, 2006, 06:45 PM
I absolutely love my 12" Powerbook. I bought it over the iBook a year ago, partly because of the upgraded features, but mostly because of the quality of the keyboard. I'm a writer, so what I mostly use the laptop for is to TYPE. The iBook keyboard is a flimsy thing that makes my hands feel cramped after a few minutes, but the Powerbook's keys just glide under my fingers.

Seeing as all I'm doing is typing away in Word, I didn't need a bigger screen or a bigger laptop. I can go up a nice hilltop with a view of the city and write my latest masterpiece (*cough*).

I do hope that they release an Intel 12" or 13" Powerbook, because if I ever by another laptop, that's what I want.

bilbo--baggins
Apr 7, 2006, 06:52 PM
Wait for the Macbook. Now is not the time to buy a G4 based Mac!

:eek: I really agree strongly. The G4 has been replaced by the G5 (except they didn't manage to get G5's into laptops). Now things have moved on from G5 to the Intel processors. Really G4's are 2 steps behind, and will be obsolete far quicker than current PowerMac G5's which are still pretty powerful machines. Just look at the jumps from MacMini G4 to MacMini Intel, and PowerBook G4 to MacBook Pro. The jump from iBook to MacBook will be just as great, and probably for the same price.

7on
Apr 7, 2006, 06:55 PM
yeah, I've decided to pick up one of the MacBooks once they are released. This whole "Windows on Macintosh" thing has perked up my interest quite a bit. I was going to wait until college graduation - but seeing how I might not graduate on time I might just borrow monies and go for a MacBook now. I have $2000 in the bank so money isn't much of an issue. I really wanted a tablet to come out... but a MacBook may just be what I need.

sintaxi
Apr 7, 2006, 06:56 PM
wow wow wow! This is all such good news. I am buying one.

BillyShears
Apr 7, 2006, 07:13 PM
ahh duh, i have an m-audio usb recording device, so i suppose it would make sense that i'm using that sound card, not the internal apple one...so i guess as long as i have the app(garageband) i should be alright?

I am almost certain that's the case, but I couldn't tell you for sure since I haven't gotten into recording on the computer yet. So you should be alright.

obeygiant
Apr 7, 2006, 07:14 PM
this rumor is akin to...
apple will release a new computer in the next 365 days.

MacRumorsReader
Apr 7, 2006, 07:24 PM
this rumor is akin to...
apple will release a new computer in the next 365 days.

pssssssshhhh!

It's not greater than 120 days and you know it :D

kretzy
Apr 7, 2006, 07:30 PM
I'm another that's going to wait until Leopard comes out before I buy anything. Hopefully by then there'll be a 13.3'' MBP or a really nicely speced MBP for me to buy!

icloud
Apr 7, 2006, 07:33 PM
I absolutely love my 12" Powerbook. I bought it over the iBook a year ago, partly because of the upgraded features, but mostly because of the quality of the keyboard. I'm a writer, so what I mostly use the laptop for is to TYPE. The iBook keyboard is a flimsy thing that makes my hands feel cramped after a few minutes, but the Powerbook's keys just glide under my fingers.

Seeing as all I'm doing is typing away in Word, I didn't need a bigger screen or a bigger laptop. I can go up a nice hilltop with a view of the city and write my latest masterpiece (*cough*).

I do hope that they release an Intel 12" or 13" Powerbook, because if I ever by another laptop, that's what I want.


I agree with this...love my powerboook. Im definately going to strap down until after leopard is released and be grabbing the first 12-15' lappy that comes my way with the ilife '07 and leopard bundle

gunm
Apr 7, 2006, 07:59 PM
Cool news. I'm hoping these rumors are true about the Macbook being duo core only (as opposed to have a core solo like the Mini). Even if the price is a little bit more, it will probably be worth it in the long run.

I'm not in the market for a new laptop right now, but I'll probably end up getting a Macbook eventually, so it's nice to hear that an official announcement could come very soon.

count chocula
Apr 7, 2006, 08:00 PM
i think ibook sounds better than macbook, but name doesnt matter to me. i'm hoping for 1.67 core duo with isight, front row, and all those goodies for 999$ upgrade the ram and hardrive and i'm set. :D

obeygiant
Apr 7, 2006, 08:08 PM
whatever happens, i prolly wont buy the first version of it.. :D :D

AidenShaw
Apr 7, 2006, 08:15 PM
And yes, 16:9 is a much more sensible ratio.
If removing pixels could ever be considered to be "sensible"....

Legacy
Apr 7, 2006, 08:23 PM
Hello folks, I am hoping for a new MacBook this June/July too as my nearly one year old iBook is getting close to expiring its warranty and needs trading for an updated, multicapable and feature-packed MacBook!

Standard features include 13.3" WideDisplay, MagSafe, MagClose (lol), and MacOS software bundle.

Here are my predictions for the upcoming models:

$999 MacBook

Intel Core Duo 1.66Ghz Processor
512Mb DDR2 Memory (2GB Max)
40Gb Hard Drive
Intel GMA 950/965 Graphics Chipset
CD-RW/DVD Combo Drive
Gigabit Ethernet, Airport and Bluetooth

$1299 MacBook

Intel Core Duo 1.66Ghz Processor
512Mb DDR2 Memory (2GB Max)
60Gb Hard Drive
Intel GMA 950/965 Graphics Chipset
SuperDrive SL
Gigabit Ethernet, Airport and Bluetooth
iSight and FrontRow with Remote

$1499 MacBook

Intel Core Duo 1.83Ghz Processor
512Mb DDR2 Memory (2GB Max)
80Gb Hard Drive
Ati Radeon X1300/1400 64Mb GPU with 128Mb BTO available
SuperDrive SL
Gigabit Ethernet, Airport and Bluetooth
iSight and FrontRow with Remote

Basis: Appleinsider

1. At least CoreDuo Processors
2. FrontRow and iSight on top two models
3. First model really intended for budget student/education
4. Appleinsider says 'several configurations' not just one or two.

Realistically, you cannot expect an iSight, FR AND CoreDuo system for under $999..come on guys...besides, the education sector is neither in need of lots of HDD capacity, dedicated graphics, iSight or FR.
MacBook Pro will most likely be bumped up to 2Ghz/2.16Ghz variants with 2.33Ghz BTO, as expected for release later by Intel. OR configs could stay the same depending on demand...

cyberddot
Apr 7, 2006, 08:24 PM
Hmmm MacBook or MacBook Pro... I can't decide.


yeah...I'm not sure either :( Though I did sell my *ell today for just a couple of C-notes less than I purchased it for 3 months ago! I reimaged the damn thing, ran updates, installed better software than provided originally, ran more updates and will soon be making an official *ell Transfer of Ownership. Then it's money in the bank until the decision gets easier.

The FIRST thing that pops to mind is that the MacBook Pro could see some improvements within a couple months, if not a Rev B quite yet, while the MacBook will still be in its first round. Then there's the difference in power....


I feel lucky to have such a tough decision to make.:o

goldenhorse
Apr 7, 2006, 08:27 PM
There was far too much confusion about the two models. At times, nothing was even separating them except the aluminum! The 12-inch PowerBook is definitely gone... I would not expect a MBP version.

so by that logic they sacrifice diveristy, flexibility and selection for supposed clarity. but then cancel it out anyway by calling them both Macbooks.

If Apple drops a popular (and needed) product line just so a few dimwits know what's going on they are fools too.

MacMosher
Apr 7, 2006, 08:27 PM
Can't wait until the 17" MBP comes out and hopefully they will be doing the free iPod deal when it is released.
Has this ever happend?

Anyways, I think I would buy an iBook but Im not sure if I can wait for leopard to come out before I buy it or not. I mean I've waited so so long for them to actually come out with the Macbook could I possibly wait even longer?


Then again. There will always be somthing bigger and brighter in the future, no matter what sparks my interest.

screensaver400
Apr 7, 2006, 08:35 PM
$1499 MacBook

Intel Core Duo 1.83Ghz Processor
512Mb DDR2 Memory (2GB Max)
80Gb Hard Drive
Ati Radeon X1300/1400 64Mb GPU with 128Mb BTO available
SuperDrive SL
Gigabit Ethernet, Airport and Bluetooth
iSight and FrontRow with Remote


I would love a machine with those specs. Factor in an ultra cool new casing, a weight of 4.6 lbs or less (current 12" PowerBook weight), and some great BTO options, this could be a winner. I'd BTO it to a 100GB 7200 RPM drive, 1GB Memory, and 128MB Video.

This would be a machine very close, if not equal to, the $1999 MacBook Pro for $100 or $200 more (after upgrades), in a portable package. I'll pull the trigger on this in a heartbeat.

count chocula
Apr 7, 2006, 08:41 PM
[QUOTE=Legacy]
Intel Core Duo 1.66Ghz Processor
512Mb DDR2 Memory (2GB Max)
40Gb Hard Drive
Intel GMA 950/965 Graphics Chipset
CD-RW/DVD Combo Drive
Gigabit Ethernet, Airport and Bluetooth
QUOTE]

i want that with 768mb/1gb ram and 60 gb hard drive

AidenShaw
Apr 7, 2006, 08:47 PM
But now win XP on the mac, you will be able to play just about anything that the hardware can handle.
Which won't really be that much until the PowerMacIntel with a dual x16 PCIe graphics cards (http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&cs=19&l=en&oc=DXPS600G1&s=dhs) comes out.

The difference between integrated graphics (on the MiniMacIntel) and the embedded chips (iMacIntel and MacIntelBook Pro) is the difference between "worse" and "bad".

screensaver400
Apr 7, 2006, 08:50 PM
Which won't really be that much until the PowerMacIntel with a dual x16 PCIe graphics cards (http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&cs=19&l=en&oc=DXPS600G1&s=dhs) comes out.

The difference between integrated graphics (on the MiniMacIntel) and the embedded chips (iMacIntel and MacIntelBook Pro) is the difference between "worse" and "bad".

I disagree. If you have two identical graphics chips, one embedded and one a card, I can't think of an advantage to the card except upgradability.

mashinhead
Apr 7, 2006, 08:53 PM
Wait for the Macbook. Now is not the time to buy a G4 based Mac!


Yeah but whats the point, theres no software for it. I'm gonna wait for that to come out, and the price on the PB to drop. and getting a 12 incher. Then when CS3 hits, its on to intel.


And basically the ibook is dead. For all those saying that the current 12 incher isn't a pro machine, thats exactly what this is. ibook and 12 inch powerbook had a baby, the macbook. I think its a great idea to just offer 3 sizes and thats it. And with that, because the ibook is now dead, i think it will be aluminum. like the powerbooks

bit density
Apr 7, 2006, 08:54 PM
Ok, here is where I think the important parts will be.

Integrated graphics, hopefully 965 parts (which will play games well enough), or 950, with 965 bump in september.

Pricing, heat, power, and capability put these right in line.

Included ISight. Parts for these are now less than 3 dollars, there is absolutely no reason not to put them into each machine.

Core Duo on all Macbooks. Fact is, until Rosetta is not used by a large percentage of target apps, Core Solo will just be too slow. Expect a down model LATER with a $799 price point. There is also plenty of pent up demand for macbooks they don't need to have a lowest price model yet.

Front Row will be included including remote.

All models will support bootcamp and will be VT ready.

Likely price point for lowest price is $999 which will initially be in short supply and represent the lowest margin computer in Apples line. This will remain in short supply until Core Duo prices come down.

Highest Price point will be $1499 which will include 1.83 Core Duo, Super Drive, 1 gig memory and 100 Gig 7200 drive. It may include, but probably not include light up keyboard.

ALL macbooks will be white plastic, though thinner and lighter, and similar battery life to existing ibooks.

Something for everyone to hate and like.

The line will extend downwords as demand starts to wane.

But my further predictions, is the Macbook Executive. SMALLER than macbook 1/2 size in width and weight, twice the battery life. Aluminum skinned Carbon casing, extremely thin superdrive (possibly no optical drive 30/70), 80 gig hard drive (low power SMALL drive), using Ultra low power core duo processors, $2199 price point. For your road executive, comes out in time for christmas.

AidenShaw
Apr 7, 2006, 08:57 PM
The question in my mind is, with the quasi-merging of the notebook lines, will "Pro" denote Merom and the iBook replacement hold onto Yonah with only certain upgrades (speed bumps, etc.)?
IMO, Merom/Conroe/Woodcrest will quickly kill off all of the 32-bit chips.

Yonah may stick around for a long time for low end and embedded applications - but once the mainstream Intel line from top to bottom is low-power 64-bit *nobody* will be using the old 32-bit chips.

And good luck with the MB and MBP on eBay after Merom ships - dead end Intel hardware is even hard to give away.

mashinhead
Apr 7, 2006, 09:01 PM
And good luck with the MB and MBP on eBay after Merom ships - dead end Intel hardware is even hard to give away.

Agreed, i was all for this when it first came out, but i'm realizeing this whole thing is really going to burn the early adopters. This chip is nothing more than a layover. It will last as long as the Newton did. By October it will be gone. And there is no software for these computers. I don't get it.

AidenShaw
Apr 7, 2006, 09:14 PM
Why do people keep expecting Apple to bring back FW800?

It isn't Apple's fault that it is gone.
Yes it is.

USB 2.0 arrived, and almost overnight was on every system - using the same connectors and cables.

1394b arrived, on a few high-end "pro" systems and required completely new connectors and cables.

Apple killed 1394b by "market segmenting" it out of existence.

50thVert
Apr 7, 2006, 09:23 PM
Any chance of the Macbook being able to drive a 30" Dual-DVI display?

-Zach

AidenShaw
Apr 7, 2006, 09:24 PM
I disagree. If you have two identical graphics chips, one embedded and one a card, I can't think of an advantage to the card except upgradability.
"integrated" is the Intel 950 graphics in the northbridge.

"embedded" is a PCIe ATI-Xnnn on the mobo.

Current gaming rigs use dual full-sized x16 PCIe cards, with their own fans and heat-sinks. You even find power supplies with special cables and connectors to feed the DC current directly to the cards (they draw too much electricity to feed through the circuit board).
_______________________

So, I was replying to a comment that said that with dual-boot - one could run games up to the limit of the hardware.

My comment is that none of the current MacIntels support any graphics solution even remotely close to a low-end PC with an x16 PCIe slot.
_______________________

Apple needs a new product line in their matrix. The gap between the MiniMacIntel and the PowerMac is enormous.

It should be filled with a mini-tower (or micro-tower) with a Conroe chip (a single dual-core 64-bit low power chip coming late summer), one or two free optical/HD bays, and a PCIe graphics slot.

Not an all-out pro machine, but also not the "laptop in a mini-cube" that the MiniMacIntel is.

AidenShaw
Apr 7, 2006, 09:30 PM
Agreed, i was all for this when it first came out, but i'm realizeing this whole thing is really going to burn the early adopters. This chip is nothing more than a layover. It will last as long as the Newton did. By October it will be gone. And there is no software for these computers. I don't get it.
And if 10.6 has true 64-bit support - the "no software" problem will be even more apparent.

Why would anyone doing a port to OSx64 even bother with a 32-bit product? The 64-bit product will be faster (like 20%) than the 32-bit, and 32-bit machines were only sold for a few months in 2006 - whereas 64-bit machines will everything thereafter.

IMO, Apple should have skipped the 32-bit Intel line completely - and offered OS on Intel only as a true 64-bit system.

But then, as you say, only the early adopters will be hurt by this. Apple knows that they have deep pockets and will happily replace a 6 month old Yonah with a new 64-bit Merom when it appears.

screensaver400
Apr 7, 2006, 09:38 PM
My comment is that none of the current MacIntels support any graphics solution even remotely close to a low-end PC with an x16 PCIe slot.


No disagreement there. I thought you were saying that a card-based graphics chip was, in and of itself, better than an embedded solution.

The best card-based solution will almost always be better than the best embedded solution because of it's modular nature, but an embedded Radeon 9200 is no worse than a card-based Radeon 9200.

macgeek2005
Apr 7, 2006, 09:39 PM
$1499 MacBook

Intel Core Duo 1.83Ghz Processor
512Mb DDR2 Memory (2GB Max)
80Gb Hard Drive
Ati Radeon X1300/1400 64Mb GPU with 128Mb BTO available
SuperDrive SL
Gigabit Ethernet, Airport and Bluetooth
iSight and FrontRow with Remote

You made be drool by typing that up. I pray to dear god that they have a machine like that. I would pay for the extra video ram, I would max out the ram to 2GB, and I would pay for a 100gb hard drive. Now THAT would be a nice computer.

screensaver400
Apr 7, 2006, 09:44 PM
You made be drool by typing that up. I pray to dear god that they have a machine like that. I would pay for the extra video ram, I would max out the ram to 2GB, and I would pay for a 100gb hard drive. Now THAT would be a nice computer.

Glad to see I have followers:
I would love a machine with those specs. Factor in an ultra cool new casing, a weight of 4.6 lbs or less (current 12" PowerBook weight), and some great BTO options, this could be a winner. I'd BTO it to a 100GB 7200 RPM drive, 1GB Memory, and 128MB Video.

:cool: :D :cool: :D :cool: :D

MacRumorsReader
Apr 7, 2006, 09:46 PM
Yes it is.

USB 2.0 arrived, and almost overnight was on every system - using the same connectors and cables.

1394b arrived, on a few high-end "pro" systems and required completely new connectors and cables.

Apple killed 1394b by "market segmenting" it out of existence.

I was thinking more along the lines of "How many intel boards have FW800?"

But you're right in one regard: Why the crap did FW800 need a special connector to begin with?

cgmpowers
Apr 7, 2006, 10:04 PM
First of all, I think it would be a terrible mistake to make the MacBook aluminum. My wife and I both have Powermac's,she has a 12" and mine is a 17". My 17" inch is just over three years (by a week or two) and has a number of dents. It no longer looks fantastic as it did when I first got it. It hasn't aged well as I use it for my main machine for the past several months. My wife's 12" is only a year old and has the same problem, dents seem to appear and she's a light user compared to me. This in an educational setting is too delicate for students! My original iBook (the clamshell) took a tumble down stairs and scuffed the wood floor but had little wear to show for its journeys.

Second. I for one would miss the FW800 port. I have an external 600GB hard drive and while it has triple interfaces, FW800 is smoking fast.

Well that's my thoughts.

Chris Powers

MacRumorsReader
Apr 7, 2006, 10:12 PM
I doubt the MB will be aluminum. But at some of the specs that y'all are dreaming, a plastic case will need to have some serious fan-age.

...or come in a brown/yellow enclosure to hide the burnt plastic.

ImAlwaysRight
Apr 7, 2006, 10:19 PM
And good luck with the MB and MBP on eBay after Merom ships - dead end Intel hardware is even hard to give away.
You must not use eBay nor know much about used Mac pricing.

Checking closed auctions, even an iBook G3 at 900MHz went for $480 (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=9707306223) and an 800MHz went for $450 (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=9708281767), both just ending today. G3 chip, no warranty, questionable battery life, ... did I say G3 chip? How old, and still maintaining close to half its original value. I have a feeling 32-bit MB and MBP will be reselling just fine in 6-10 months. :rolleyes:

Lotsa buyers aren't willing to spend top dollar for the latest and greatest (even if the majority of posters on this forum are willing), but they are satisfied to save several hundred dollars and get a used system.

Agreed, i was all for this when it first came out, but i'm realizeing this whole thing is really going to burn the early adopters. This chip is nothing more than a layover. It will last as long as the Newton did. By October it will be gone. And there is no software for these computers. I don't get it.Crips! You guys for real? Or are you just trying to sell G4 iBooks on ebay and steer people away from new purchases? ;) G4-->Yonah is a LOT bigger jump than Yonah-->Merom talking performance. As for software, most of the apps I use are already universal. And, the others all run on Rosetta, which, on a dual core Yonah Macbook at 1.67GHz will be about as fast under Rosetta as the currently shipping 1.33GHz G4 iBook. So to make the assertion "no software" is available for these computers is just, well, 100% false. :rolleyes:

swingerofbirch
Apr 7, 2006, 10:20 PM
i'd rather the macbook not be aluminum, i'm a little over it, shiny white or black would be nice, but what i want to know is why a few of you have been saying early adopters are going to get burned when it comes to software compatibility...you're saying that faster 64 bit chips will come out...how will that affect a yonah based computer's abilityto run software? i ask not to discredit what you are saying, i am actually curious since i have been itching to buy a macbook (ibook)

rockthecasbah
Apr 7, 2006, 10:24 PM
I hope Apple doesn't have the MacBooks be Aluminum, to separate from the MacBook Pro. As far as what it will be, i have no idea, as long as they aren't ugly white like now. Somehow i don't see Black either, so i really don't know what to call in that regard.

As far as components, i don't like this replacing the 12'' PB. They should have the lines be separate: Core Solo MacBooks, Core Duo MacBook Pros. That would further separate the two. Who knows, maybe they will do it like that, but I just don't like the idea of cramming all those replacements into 1 machine..but as long as battery life is much better than the MBPs are right now, i won't complain....:o

mashinhead
Apr 7, 2006, 10:39 PM
Crips! You guys for real? Or are you just trying to sell G4 iBooks on ebay and steer people away from new purchases? ;) G4-->Yonah is a LOT bigger jump than Yonah-->Merom talking performance. As for software, most of the apps I use are already universal. And, the others all run on Rosetta, which, on a dual core Yonah Macbook at 1.67GHz will be about as fast under Rosetta as the currently shipping 1.33GHz G4 iBook. So to make the assertion "no software" is available for these computers is just, well, 100% false. :rolleyes:


Si i'm not saying the chip isn't faster. But the apps aren't there. Rosetta is SLOWER than a G4. So my point is what is the point of having a faster chip you can not take advantage of? The only apps i know that are universal are Logic and FCS. Thats it. I think the main point was that by the time all the apps and OS's are universal. This chip will be gone. So what is the point.

ImAlwaysRight
Apr 7, 2006, 10:56 PM
Si i'm not saying the chip isn't faster. But the apps aren't there. Rosetta is SLOWER than a G4. So my point is what is the point of having a faster chip you can not take advantage of? The only apps i know that are universal are Logic and FCS. Thats it. I think the main point was that by the time all the apps and OS's are universal. This chip will be gone. So what is the point.
According to Apple, there are currently 1,418 (http://guide.apple.com/universal/) universal apps. So, quite far from "no" universal apps being available, as you stated.

As I said, the majority of the apps I use are already universal. I am in the market for a small laptop for presentations (using Keynote, which IS universal). Instead of listing what is universal, you are probably better off going through your apps and listing what isn't universal. There are only 4-5 apps I use that are not universal. And they all run under Rosetta. Sure, it may be 20% slower than a 1.33 iBook. But don't forget about overall system responsiveness, or the fact that the universal apps are going to be about 100% faster on a 1.67 core duo than a 1.33 G4.

That is why I am buying the Yonah Macbook when it comes out. To me, it would be silly to buy a G4 iBook. How obsolete is that? And waiting for Merom isn't an option. Even if one DID buy Yonah today and wanted Merom when it comes out, it's not like your Yonah investment is worthless. See my previous post. eBay will give you the majority of your purchase price back that you can apply the $ to a Merom laptop.

It's kind of silly to advise someone needing a laptop now to wait for Merom in 6-10 months. Who knows when Apple will even use Merom, and they will probably stick to Yonah in the Mini's and Macbooks anyway, just like when G4 went to Powerbook, the iBook still had G3 chip for a long time.

In the laptop market, Yonah is a HUGE step forward for Mac OS users, compared to the G4. Merom laptops are not going to be that much of an improvement over Yonah. And, if you wait, you'll miss out on Yonah's performance now.

If you have a G3 or G4 Mac laptop and are considering upgrading, but you are only able to upgrade every 3 years or so, you may want to wait for "the next best thing" and wait for Merom. But in the mean time, you still miss out on faster performance. Me, I can buy/sell what I want, when I want. When Merom Mac laptops start shipping, I have a hunch I'll be holding on to my Yonah Macbook for something that will give a bigger performance boost down the road.

~Mac-Man~
Apr 7, 2006, 11:14 PM
Iv been looking into MBP's, but it's only the first gen. By next like quarter theirs gonna be a new improvment made...i guess thats apples way isnt it!

But i like the idea of the MacBooks replacing the iBooks, hopefully theyre annodized alluminum, not that god awful white!:D

Now Then, are they going to change the G5's over to 2 or 4 Intels?...wouldent mind one of them!:)

----------------------------------------------------------
G5 Quad- 500gb HDD- 3GB Ram- 61inchLCD

qtip919
Apr 7, 2006, 11:15 PM
First of all, I think it would be a terrible mistake to make the MacBook aluminum. My wife and I both have Powermac's,she has a 12" and mine is a 17". My 17" inch is just over three years (by a week or two) and has a number of dents. It no longer looks fantastic as it did when I first got it. It hasn't aged well as I use it for my main machine for the past several months. My wife's 12" is only a year old and has the same problem, dents seem to appear and she's a light user compared to me. This in an educational setting is too delicate for students! My original iBook (the clamshell) took a tumble down stairs and scuffed the wood floor but had little wear to show for its journeys.

Second. I for one would miss the FW800 port. I have an external 600GB hard drive and while it has triple interfaces, FW800 is smoking fast.

Well that's my thoughts.

Chris Powers

I couldnt agree more.

About 2 months into owning my 15", I dropped it (only about 1-2 feet) off of a coffee table onto the floor. It really wasnt that bad of a fall, but the case is dented, and so my powerbook is just not looking all that hot.

I have several other Windows machines, and they all have nicks and scratches, but none of them have thin metal cases, and therefore none of them have dents.

Dents just make a gorgeous peice of hardware like a powerbook look terrible....

ImAlwaysRight
Apr 7, 2006, 11:22 PM
Iv been looking into MBP's, but it's only the first gen. By next like quarter theirs gonna be a new improvment made...i guess thats apples way isnt it!
It's actually every computer manufacturer's way, and every electronics manufacturer's way, and every car manufacturer's way, etc. ... :)

I dunno, I keep thinking back to the first generation G5 Power Macs. I bought a dual 2.0GHz with Radeon 9700 128MB -- that was one heck of a first generation computer. Don't know about the first generation MBP's or the upcoming MB's, but they sure aren't slouches and will last quite a while. Heck, folks are still using and buying iBook G3's, not even supported by OS 10.4. I think a Yonah MB/MBP first generation is a pretty good investment. A bad investment would be an iBook G4 at this point. :rolleyes:

Dents just make a gorgeous peice of hardware like a powerbook look terrible....And don't forget about temperature. Warm plastic is a lot more tolerable than hot aluminum on the lap. Although I like the look of the metal ones better, and even though the white shows the faint scratches more (you gotta look for 'em), the white plastic probably is a better material for Apple's entry-level laptop. I could go either way, personally. Just release the things already!!!

SeaFox
Apr 7, 2006, 11:28 PM
I think it's kinda cool how teleconfrencing cameras are becoming standard equipment on Macs. Maybe the next time they update cinema displays they'll add iSights to them as well.:D

In Apple America, display watches YOU!

Sorry, sorry, I couldn't resist that, although it really belongs on Slashdot.

Multimedia
Apr 7, 2006, 11:28 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

ThinkSecret claims (http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0604macbook.html) that Apple has begun manufacturing the new "MacBook" (Intel iBook) which should be available in the next 30-60 days.

Meanwhile, a 17" MacBook Pro with brighter display is also in the works and should arrive around the same time. The 17" MacBook Pro is said to be otherwise similar to the current 15" MacBook Pro.Boy this is one rumor I don't want to believe. If the 17" doesn't have Expresscard/54 I won't be able to pull the trigger. Glad I won't have to wait for the 64-bit Merom in the Fall to put in 4GB of ram - just wait for vendors to like Omni to offer 2GB sticks for a reasonable price. But if they don't put EC/54 in to begin with, the chances it will be in the Fall model diminish. I think the 15" offering without EC/54 is a pretty cheap, shortsighted cost-cutting oversight. The differences between the 34 and 54 card offerings are HUGE. :( :mad:

There needs to be more than just a bigger screen and a little more speed to differentiate the 17" from the 15" to justify the much higher price Apple will likely ask us to pay. Restoration of a FW800 port would help a lot too.

deadpoet
Apr 7, 2006, 11:34 PM
In a PC at least, the GMA950 can run Half Life 2 at between 20-25 FPS. This directly goes against the assertion that the GMA950 "won't run" these games as GFLPraxis states.

Running a game, especially an FPS, at 20-25 FPS is a sick joke. I'm not expecting 100 FPS on entry level Macs, but to say an Intel Mac mini runs modern 3D games just fine is plain ludicrous.

I can accept it if the low-end MacBook has integrated graphics. But if the "high-end" MacBook does not have a decent graphics card, I will be appalled.

It does not look like the 12" Powerbook is being replaced with a MacBook Pro. Therefore I will have no choice but to go for a 13" MacBook. Apple had better offer a kick-arse variant of the MacBook, or there will be trouble. I want a small and light laptop because I don't like carrying around heavy things, it's bad for my back. I want something light and portable which still offers enough power for serious graphics work as well as the occasional LAN gaming session.

FWIW there is no way I would call the upcoming MacBook a budget laptop. I'm sick of apologists making excuses for crappy specs and capabilities.

I bought my iBook G3 800MHz three years ago precisely because it had a decent graphics card. I love my iBook, it's been a rock-solid laptop.

If all MacBooks feature only integrated graphics with no option to upgrade to a better card, then I will be disgusted indeed.

Surreal
Apr 7, 2006, 11:37 PM
There needs to be more than just a bigger screen and a little more speed to differentiate the 17" from the 15" to justify the much higher price Apple will likely ask us to pay. Restoration of a FW800 port would help a lot too.

1900x1200
X1800
Expresscard/54
FW800

that's all i would need. really. the resolution could even be slightly lower. (no less than the current res though.

AidenShaw
Apr 7, 2006, 11:44 PM
I guess I will have to wait for the 64-bit Merom in the Fall anyway so I can put in more than 2GB of ram.
The chipset used in the MacIntels supports 4 GiB of RAM, but the MBP only has two SO-DIMM slots.

2 GiB SO-DIMM cards are starting to show up - Dell/Lenovo/HP are all showing 4 GiB as the max on their laptops that use the same components that Apple is using.

It would be stupid of Apple to hack the firmware to block the usage of 2 GiB SO-DIMMs.

suMMx
Apr 7, 2006, 11:51 PM
seriously the people complaining about the possibility of a non standard dedicated graphics chip and non standard core duo are pretty lame. This is an entry level laptop and should have an entry level price. With a core solo integrated graphics macbook and a price tag of $1k there will be much more "switchers" than if it was only a core duo/dedicated graphics at $1300-1500. Personally i dont game on laptops and i dont need a dual core chip on my notebook, id rather save $300 and get a single core which works great for most laptops.

Brundlefly
Apr 8, 2006, 12:02 AM
What game(s) were you playing?


the old ibook can't play games for poop. neither I imagine can this one.

Multimedia
Apr 8, 2006, 12:06 AM
Looks like a single core will be the $999 model and a dual core will be $1299-$1499.

Goodbye 12" ibook and powerbookNope. AppleInsider Says All Core Duo MacBooks. :) Just smaller and slower than the MBPs and w/o Expresscard/34 expansion. :) But they will display native lower resolution 1280 x 720p HD which is great. :cool:

1984
Apr 8, 2006, 12:33 AM
Why do people keep expecting Apple to bring back FW800?

It isn't Apple's fault that it is gone.

All my external hard drives have FW800 ports. There are a bunch of FW800 devices out there for pro applications. It is Apple's fault that it's gone because they were the ones who removed it. Now if Apple wants to call these pro models, especially the 17" version, then they need to at least replace it with an eSATA port or an ExpreesCard/54 slot. It would be better to have eSATA on board though as it frees up the slot for other options.

neoelectronaut
Apr 8, 2006, 12:44 AM
All I can really say is...bring it on.

I likely will not be getting one, or at least for some time, but it's always need to see the new toys coming out of Apple.

Man, selling the $999 iBook at work with 512MB of ram and a 40GB Hard Drive vs. a $749 Acer with gig of ram and 100GB HD isn't exactly the easiest thing in the world to do, so I'm excited. ******* excited.

neoelectronaut
Apr 8, 2006, 12:47 AM
Wait for the Macbook. Now is not the time to buy a G4 based Mac!

Well, I know for a fact that I WILL be scarfing up one of the remaining Superdrive 1.42 Mac Minis left over once they hit N-Status (Super-Discontinued, as I like to call it.) along with the accompanied price slashings.

iHeartTheApple
Apr 8, 2006, 01:06 AM
I'm just wondering what it's gonna look like...Can't wait for the 17" MBP...oh yeah! :D

markie
Apr 8, 2006, 01:07 AM
The resolution is too low vertically for my liking. 768 is CRAMPED. Losing 48 pixels will be insane! I just don't see 720 high as being usable, sorry Apple... I'll just have to save up for a MBP of my own (I REALLY like our MBP at church)

NicoMan
Apr 8, 2006, 01:07 AM
But they will display native lower resolution 1280 x 720p HD which is great. :cool:

How can 1280*720 be great? If it is really that resolution I just don't get it.

1. Apple have a standard 16:10 ratio across the whole range. Why change it now to 16:9?

2. That would mean even less vertical resolution than the current iBook/12"PB. Which is not what you want. Already one of the issues IMHO of these is that you spend your time scrolling when you browse the web. If you even reduce the vertical resolution, it becomes ridiculous.

3. 1280*800 is now almost standard across the PC world. Which also means that Apple would have no trouble sourcing them. Has anyone seen the latest SZ1 series from Sony (I know this is a Windows computer)? the 13.3" screen is fantastic, resolution 1280*800 (that's 16:10). I'd like those specs (in a different enclosure obviously, one that doesn't yell "Plastic PeeCee!!"). I know this is an expensive machine but I'd like to think that this is the way to go, at leat for a small MBP.

NicoMan
Apr 8, 2006, 01:08 AM
The resolution is too low vertically for my liking. 768 is CRAMPED. Losing 48 pixels will be insane! I just don't see 720 high as being usable, sorry Apple... I'll just have to save up for a MBP of my own (I REALLY like our MBP at church)

Agreed 100%.
You just beat me to it.

iAlan
Apr 8, 2006, 01:14 AM
I am sure it will be a nice machine once it comes out.

Sir Steve said he wanted 'Mac' in all product names or something to that effect, and I think he was refering to the computer line (not iPod or future consumer products). So the new 'pro laptops' are MacBook Pros. Why do we asssume that the 'consumer laptop' will be called a MacBook. I think this will confuse the product range - so why not a name like ’iMacBook' or 'iMac Portable' and the new 'towers' well that is a naming convection we can all but guess?

Just a thought...

Ensoniq
Apr 8, 2006, 01:15 AM
Reality Check:

1 - Most likely, the MacBooks will be white plastic, just like today's iBooks. Apple didn't change the iMac color/material with the Intel switch, so it's not likely the MacBooks will be any different. That said, I also think that a choice of black or white like the iPod is a good idea.

2 - The G4 Mac Minis were very similar to the iBook in specs. So the new Intel Mac Minis tell us a lot about what to expect. Sorry to burst everyone's bubble, but the MacBook is going to spec out somewhere between the Mac Mini and the MacBook Pro. Nothing more, nothing less. (And I expect prices to remain the same...)

3 - Video: Like it or not, the MacBook is probably going to have GMA950 graphics, like the Mini. Dedicated 64 MB VRAM is possible, but 128 MB is completely out of the question, so get over it.

4 - CPU: Like the Mac Mini, I am guessing one model with Core Solo @ 1.5 GHz, and one with Core Duo @ 1.67 GHz.

5 - Look at the two Mac mini models:

a) Core Solo 1.5/512 MB/60 GB/GMA 950/Combo - $599
b) Core Duo 1.66/512 MB/80 GB/GMA 950/SuperDrive - $799

Add $400-$500 for a 13.3" screen, keyboard, trackpad, iSight, battery, Magsafe connector, Sudden-Motion Sensor (and maybe even a backlit keyboard/ambient lighting sensor) and you've got your $999/$1299 MacBooks.

The MacBooks are probably going to just be Mac Minis with the extras above. Wishing for more than that will likely leave you disappointed. However, even with specs exactly as above these are very nice upgrades to the iBook and well worth the price if they do not go up.

lvnmacs
Apr 8, 2006, 02:01 AM
I'm hoping Apple does not do the integrated graphics on this one. I am not a gamer, but I am so happy with the graphic performace on my 15" G4 PB. I am ready for a new (Smaller) one soon. C'mon Apple!

BlizzardBomb
Apr 8, 2006, 02:09 AM
Making room for the iSight, just like the MBP?

:rolleyes: The iSight is on a piece of plastic at the top, not physically ON the screen. The MBP is 16:10 (1440x900). Think Secret's prediction is 16:9 (1280x720). The iSight doesn't make ANY difference to the resolution or its aspect ratio. I would hope Apple goes for 1280x800 because the more vertical resolution they have, the better.

eXan
Apr 8, 2006, 03:09 AM
I still don't get why it would be re-branded as "MacBook".

The "i" was a consumer thing. iBook + iPod + iMac. Or should we expect a "MacPod" soon.

Ugh, I'm going to miss the old name.

MacPod - thats looks (and sounds) wired. Hope Apple is not going to rename iPod...

eXan
Apr 8, 2006, 03:20 AM
:rolleyes: The iSight is on a piece of plastic at the top, not physically ON the screen. The MBP is 16:10 (1440x900). Think Secret's prediction is 16:9 (1280x720). The iSight doesn't make ANY difference to the resolution or its aspect ratio. I would hope Apple goes for 1280x800 because the more vertical resolution they have, the better.

No, iSight actually DOES make difference. Why would they have cut 60-pixel high chunk of the display? You know, it used to be 1440x960 pixels in 15 inch Powerbooks. They have done it to free up the room for iSight above they screen, but some space is still left free there and this what makes MBP look ugly to me. The area around the screen should be the same size, and not more at the top.

FarSide
Apr 8, 2006, 04:30 AM
from a
12" 1024 x 768 (786432 Pixels)
to a
13.3" 1280 x 720 (921600 Pixels) :confused:

I guess with only 720 Pixels it will get hard to use that MacBook (iBook was better) for even something like semi serious work. The normal resolution for widescreen would been 1280 x 854 or 1152 x 768 - which I personally prefer upon the ultra wide HD cinema "something"...