As mentioned it depends on what you do with your machine. Apple will not allow a power user to acquire a sub 1000 portable that might outperform its higher end portables. The reason being is that Apple knows that majority of its consumer will not fully utilize the power the UniBody machines has to offer and by the time its consumers even catch up to that level, something better will be released and if these users do need this sort of power there are other options. Majority of the people and this is from experience use only a portion of they machines power may it be portable or desktop. And since Apple is now using x86 technology it makes no sense to buy the top end of any portable of desktop unless you can really afford it and can justify the price.
While not everyone is a gamer or constantly encoding videos, people DO take advantage of the power in other little ways. For example, multi-tasking. The Core 2 Duo allows for many many more applications to be running at once, smoothly. There are other instances here and there. Like playing with their pictures in iPhoto, or watching youtube (since Flash on OS X is so inefficient). As time goes on people will use more power without even realizing it.
So even for the average user, that DDR3 memory will make all the difference in the world a year or two from now when it means the difference between having their picture editing show up instantly or within a second or two, even if they don't directly realize it.
If you buy this machine and intend to keep it for 2-4 years, you would not be kicking yourself then if you bought the UniBody MB.
I'd be kicking myself if I bought a plastic MacBook. I did! One who has a plastic MacBook that is more than a year old and has not yet cracked should consider themselves incredibly lucky.
I have a SR MBP 17" and I have yet to see its dual core be used to its full advantage.
Again, as I said, people will do things that do use that power and don't realize it. Most people don't realize what it takes to get a DVD compressed to H.264 in a timely fashion. For the average person who just wants to put a DVD on their fancy new iPod touch, that extra bandwidth is going to make all the difference in the world.
Maybe Snow Leopard will change this, however I have no requirement and remember this machine does not stutter when playing 1080p video either.
Must not be very high bitrate video, seeing as how video decoding in OS X is 100% software based. The UniBody Macs and presumably the new white MacBook do a slight level of hardware decoding, but only enough to take the CPU use down a little bit. Not the same level that Windows does.
I can say I would not be purchasing the UniBody MB as it just not worth it, in another 6 months your $300 saved would have acquired a better return then if you were to have "invested" it in depreciating technology.
What?
How is the UniBody MacBook not worth it? Especially compared to a netbook? It's a fully featured portable computer. It's not built as awful as nearly all netbooks are (that HP aluminum one is the only decent one). And unlike netbooks, its not woefully underpowered and good for nothing. You want to talk about something that isn't worth the money, look at netbooks. An aluminum MacBook is a fully featured computer that is 100% portable. It is good enough to be your ONLY computer. And that is what it is designed for.
Likewise, the plastic MacBook is also designed to be a fully featured completely portable computer, but at a lower cost than the unibody model.
In all honesty, its silly to say that the UniBody MacBook is not worth it, especially when you already have a 17" MBP and an iMac. You already have a portable and a desktop, so whats the point even getting a netbook? Aside from the fact that netbooks are completely and utterly useless, you already have the desktop and a portable!
Like I was saying, the way you're comparing the MacBooks just doesn't make sense. Both systems are designed to be PRIMARY computers, good enough to be the ONLY computer the buyer owns. They're not meant to be half functional, half-assed computers like netbooks. And when compared directly, the $300 more you spend on the UniBody goes much farther in the way you'll have a higher quality and longer lasting screen, much faster RAM, better battery life, etc.
Certainly my electronics has all depreciated in value, however they are still functional and it has not dropped in value is not as drastic.
How would your $300 saved on the plastic MacBook be better than the UniBody Mac again? The UniBody will last longer, it will be faster in the long run, the battery will last longer, the screen will last longer, the case will NOT crack as the plastic case is guaranteed to do.. That extra $300 buys you at least an extra 2 years of usable life compared to the plastic MacBook.
Matter of opinion, superior since you have to buy the only external display that support MDP, or it the reason that its something refreshing.
Or you can buy the mini-DisplayPort to DVI or VGA adapter and use whatever monitor you like.
Just the same way you absolutely HAVE to buy a mini-DVI to whatever adapter for the plastic MacBook.
Considering portability, Apple has always crippled battery life in all its products.
uh.. what? The average unibody MacBook gets around 5 hours of battery life. My real world experience with it is just that with the screen set to the lowest. With the plastic MacBook and the screen set to the lowest, it's about 4.5 hours. At least thats what I got.
Apple did this with the original iPod and continue to do so at present, when other manufactures of mp3 players and 3rd party battery replacement offer double the battery life, seems kinda odd that Apple for which they ask and we pay a premium only offer a mediocre battery.
Again, what? The iPod classic 120GB, in real world testing, gets over 40 hours of battery life.
http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/reviews/entry/apple-ipod-classic-120gb/P2 iLounge puts it at 42:29. The iPod touch 2G at 39 hours music playback. They claim 30 hours and 21 minutes with the iPod nano 3G, but mine actually lasts for almost 33 hours. My 80GB 5.5G iPod is rated for what? 7 hours of video battery life, but when I play video on it that is optimized for the screen it lasts for 18 hours. My 2G 4GB iPod mini was rated for 18 hours of battery life, yet for the first 2.5 years of its life it was able to playback for 26 hours.
iPod battery life has been grossly UNDERstated since the 4G iPods. Their computer battery life ratings are generally spot on.
You also can't find "double capacity" batteries for anything other than really old iPods (first 3 generations) any more. There is one for the 30GB 5G iPod, but its so ridiculously large that you need to swap the backing out for a 60/80GB back.
There is a very good possibility that Apple has put in a lower grade battery in the PolyCarb MB to make the UniBody MB look superior. Or maybe its the bottleneck HDD running at 5400 RPM that is used by both the UniBody and PolyCarb MB. People are not looking at the entire package, focusing on a few specs does not make a system more capable than another.
Actually, the plastic MacBooks have a battery with a designed capacity of roughly 5200mAh. The aluminum MacBooks have both a physically smaller battery and lower capacity battery at about 4200mAh. The screen, using 30% less power, and the RAM also using 30% less power, combined with the smaller motherboard and better cooling that lets the fan run at much lower speeds while under load help the battery last longer.
