Apple Releases Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro

[thunda32]

I find the discussion of the glossy screen vs. the standard screen amazing, how some can say the glare is terrible and others can saw there is absolutely no glare. I guess the truth is somewhere in between.

I've been waiting for several months now for this day to come so I could order a new MBP. As I waited I visited my local Apple store many times. Each time I loved the glossy screen in terms of the clarity and color. If you set them side by side and compare a glossy screen vs the matte screen the glossy wins hands down in terms of the quality of the picture and colors. BUT, each time I've visited the Apple store I came back convinced that despite the benefits of the glossy screen, the glare issue would be a problem for me, and how I use my laptop, in that I either use it in my family room or kitchen, with banks of windows behind me.

I couldn't get past the glare issue. Don't let anyone here say there is NO glare; there is glare. The question is how it will affect you, and how you use your MBP. I think I could get used to the glare, but given how I use it, I think it would bother me.

So today, my first inclination was to order my new MBP with the matte screen. But I decided to wait, and go to the Apple store one more time to review the options. When I first walked up to the MBPs, the first thing I saw as I walked up to a glossy screen was the reflections from the lights of the store. I thought that sealed it for me, and it might, but I still liked the colors from that glossy screen!

So do I go with my head or my heart?!? We'll see. My Dell laptop still works well, at least as well as a PC works! So I'm not in dire needs for the MBP right away. So I'll ponder a little while longer, see what comments we get from folks that should be getting their new MBPs over the next few weeks, and then decide what to order.

So I'm still pondering, for now, but my trigger finger is getting very itchy!!

It can be a really tough decision. In the end I think I'de regret losing out on the wicked beautiful screen moreso than being annoyed by any glare. Good luck in making up your mind!

 

[digitalbiker]

finally, what i relief.
Just placed my order for a stock 15" 2.33GHz MBP
This finally ends my waiting, which is what I've been doing since mid/late july when rumors were that the merom MBP would be annouced at the keynote at the WWDC... on August 7th!!!
wow
In the next two weeks I'll be able to say goodbye to the 400Mhz, 256MB RAM PowerBook G4 I've been loaning from a friend... what an upgrade, haha.

No kidding. You should really get a boost from this upgrade. My god man, 400 Mhz 256MB Ram, will that thing even run OS X.

 

[countach]

Go check out the interactive chart HERE

The 4200 RPM drive is slow... but uses a lot less power.

A 20% slower drive for 100% more space? I'd prefer the space. Besides which, cramming a file system up to the gills will slow it down anyway. I'll betcha that a 200MB drive that is 40% full will blow the doors off of a 100MB 7500 drive that is 80% full. 90% full and forget it, you've got a slug. Give the machine plenty of space and you'll have less fragmentation. Try and work that into your artificial benchmarks.

 

[bob_hearn]

No kidding. You should really get a boost from this upgrade. My god man, 400 Mhz 256MB Ram, will that thing even run OS X.

Heh. Doesn't seem that long ago to me that the 40 MHz Mac IIfx was "wicked fast". That was Apple's tagline for it. I mean, damn, it was 40 times faster than an Apple II! I am getting old...

 

[giovanni.apd]

No kidding. You should really get a boost from this upgrade. My god man, 400 Mhz 256MB Ram, will that thing even run OS X.

Yeah, its quite suprising actually! Especially considering that the apx 12GB HDD is virtually full and that its been upgraded all the way to OSX ver 10.3.9!!!
I'm actually quite impressed at how it handles everything with prominent but less lag than you'd think(iTunes, Preview, Safari, MSN Messenger, Microsoft Offfice all at the same time). Having said that, those seem to be the only applications it is capable of running, haha

 

[dogbone]

So do I go with my head or my heart?!?

Neither you go with what you won't regret later. There is a sure fire way to find out which that is.

Get someone to go into the store with you, tell them to choose which ever one *they* want without telling you which it will be, gloss or matte.

I can assure you that before you leave the store you will know if you want to keep it or change it.

 

[xenotaku]

hmmm

Any reports of the battery life? I have always been dissapointed with the MacBook Pro battery life.

 

[JackSYi]

I find the discussion of the glossy screen vs. the standard screen amazing, how some can say the glare is terrible and others can saw there is absolutely no glare. I guess the truth is somewhere in between.

I've been waiting for several months now for this day to come so I could order a new MBP. As I waited I visited my local Apple store many times. Each time I loved the glossy screen in terms of the clarity and color. If you set them side by side and compare a glossy screen vs the matte screen the glossy wins hands down in terms of the quality of the picture and colors. BUT, each time I've visited the Apple store I came back convinced that despite the benefits of the glossy screen, the glare issue would be a problem for me, and how I use my laptop, in that I either use it in my family room or kitchen, with banks of windows behind me.

I couldn't get past the glare issue. Don't let anyone here say there is NO glare; there is glare. The question is how it will affect you, and how you use your MBP. I think I could get used to the glare, but given how I use it, I think it would bother me.

So today, my first inclination was to order my new MBP with the matte screen. But I decided to wait, and go to the Apple store one more time to review the options. When I first walked up to the MBPs, the first thing I saw as I walked up to a glossy screen was the reflections from the lights of the store. I thought that sealed it for me, and it might, but I still liked the colors from that glossy screen!

So do I go with my head or my heart?!? We'll see. My Dell laptop still works well, at least as well as a PC works! So I'm not in dire needs for the MBP right away. So I'll ponder a little while longer, see what comments we get from folks that should be getting their new MBPs over the next few weeks, and then decide what to order.

So I'm still pondering, for now, but my trigger finger is getting very itchy!!

I currently own a MacBook (sold it to a good friend) and did order the MATTE 128 VRAM MBP this morning. I honestly believe that the glossy looks better than the matte screens, however, glossy screens do not feel professional to me. Sure it may look better, but is overly saturated and are not color accurate (from first hand experience of editing and printing photos from my trip to Peru this summer, the print definitely did not come out the same as they appeared on screen).

There is a reason why most moniters are matte (especially the Cinema Displays), and looking into my career, working with photos, graphics, and layouts at my marketing/advertising internship will definitely require the matte screen. The scale tipping factor for choosing matte was asking myself: how many real professionals would really prefer glossy over matte?

Either way the MacBook Pros blows any PC notebook out of the water (and not based on specs please)

 

[PeterC.]

I just placed my order:

15"
2.33 ghz
2gb RAM
160 GB HD
Glossy Screen (was really going back and forth between matte)

I can't wait! Actually I can but it's really hurting me job wise since I don't have a laptop to show designs to my clients. I do a fair bit of graphic work and we use gloosy screens without a problem. The only thing that really bugs me about glossy vs. matte is that you notice smudges and dust on the gloosy screen more so than on the matte. I'm meticulous(anal if you want) about keeping my computer and electronic devices in pristine condition so that makes me constantly wipe down the screen with a lens wipe even though it's prominent when the computer is off.

So what I have to say to those debating between screens is:


GO GLOSSY!!!

 

[Multimedia]

Looks Like Easy Access HD Bay Didn't Make This "Revision"

Does N-E1 know if the HDDs R easily replaceable like the MacBooks?

So far it appears not. But we need the repair manual to know for sure.

 

[digitalbiker]

There is a reason why most monitors are matte (especially the Cinema Displays)

Yeah, the reason is because Apple is painfully slow about updating to newer tech when it comes to graphics and monitors.

Apple always is the last big computer maker to get the latest GPU cards, the latest system buses, higher-resolution displays, and now high-end glossy displays.

If you go to any professional video production shop, almost all of the high-end DLP, LCD, and Plasma TV's have glossy displays. The primary reason is for better blacks and higher contrast. LCD's inherently have more trouble producing dark blacks than plasma or DLP and the glossy screen is designed to enhance blacks.

Also the glossy displays have the same color calibration capabilities that the matte finished displays do. Just calibrate the monitor to match your output printer.

 

[countach]

Sure it may look better, but is overly saturated and are not color accurate (from first hand experience of editing and printing photos from my trip to Peru this summer, the print definitely did not come out the same as they appeared on screen).

Uh, the glossy can display blacker blacks and more saturated colors. That means it has the POTENTIAL to display MUCH more accurately.

Whether it actually does or not depends on calibration and software.

How can matte be said to be accurate when it can't even display black properly?? Not to mention that matte is code word for unsharp. That's what that matte surface does, it reflects the light every which way, which is like smothering vaseline over the lens of your camera.

 

[macman2790]

why do people always say that the 0.17Ghz is irrelevant??
If that were true, why would intel even release the 2.33GHz version? Some may be able to back up their point by saying that the average consumer won't notice the small percentage of a speed bump, but defending the sacrifice of the 256MB video card AND the 0.17Ghz processing speed is a more difficult task.

makes perfect sense to the ones who are contemplating between the two, i don't think they are noticing the vram difference.

 

[JackSYi]

Uh, the glossy can display blacker blacks and more saturated colors. That means it has the POTENTIAL to display MUCH more accurately.

Whether it actually does or not depends on calibration and software.

How can matte be said to be accurate when it can't even display black properly?? Not to mention that matte is code word for unsharp. That's what that matte surface does, it reflects the light every which way, which is like smothering vaseline over the lens of your camera.

Wait...I thought matte was the code word to have Alpha team left flank the infantry while Bravo defend the north bridge. Haha, I love how people defend their beloved glossy screens. Its all good man, no need to get angry, we're all friends here.

Yeah, the reason is because Apple is painfully slow about updating to newer tech when it comes to graphics and monitors.

Apple always is the last big computer maker to get the latest GPU cards, the latest system buses, higher-resolution displays, and now high-end glossy displays.

If you go to any professional video production shop, almost all of the high-end DLP, LCD, and Plasma TV's have glossy displays. The primary reason is for better blacks and higher contrast. LCD's inherently have more trouble producing dark blacks than plasma or DLP and the glossy screen is designed to enhance blacks.

Also the glossy displays have the same color calibration capabilities that the matte finished displays do. Just calibrate the monitor to match your output printer.

P.S. I don't think "professionals" edit on plasma, DLP, or LCD TELEVISIONS. Sure they might show off a clip to a client on plasmas but no editing is done on GLOSSY anything.

 

[countach]

But then common sense settled in. Yes, Apple has done a great job minimizing glare. But lighting and reflection is still an issue with the glossy screens, to say nothing of keeping them clean.

I'd prefer to clean a glossy screen. Run your finger over a glossy screen and a matte screen. Feel the roughness of the matte? That roughness makes it more susceptible to damage. Rub it a lot and it will lose its matteness. Then you've got an obvious spot on your screen. The matteness is actually a roughness that reflects light every which way and makes everything unsharp. Look closely at the pixels on matte and gloss. On matte the seem fuzzy.

 

[countach]

why is the 160gb better than the 120gb hd? (other than the obvious fact that its 40gb larger) both run at 5400rpm, no? shouldnt the difference between the two be negligible?

No, because the larger disk has more bits per revolution.

 

[iBorg20181]

So far it appears not. But we need the repair manual to know for sure.

Multimedia, I fear that you are right .... I should know by 11/7, when my new baby is due to arrive! That appears to be the only thing missing from my "wish list" for this revision!

BTW, thanks for all of your words of wisdom, and encouragement, to those of us waiting on this upgrade - just wanted to let you know that your voice is appreciated on these boards!



iBorg

 

[countach]

Sorry, but is there *any* 64-bit support at all?

I didn't think so.

There's a likely potential for 64-bit support in the future, but the OSx86 build has no support for x64. None.

Yes, it's good "future-proofing", but as far as any benefit today - nada. (Unless maybe you have ADC and you're developing new 64-bit apps for 10.5...)

Yes, OSX at the Darwin level has some 64bit support I believe. But sure, most of the potential is just that - potential.

But if you're going to keep the laptop 4 years, you may wish you had 64 bit.

 

[countach]

Just wondering but I don't think that anyone has mentioned whether using BootCamp and Windows XP PRO will require the x64 version or if the 32-bit version will work just as fine! Also, would there be any advantage in using XP PRO x64 now that the MBP has Merom? I use solidworks a lot and it would be the only app I would need windows for!

thanks

Don't get XP 64 bit! Nobody uses it, thus drivers and support is a pain. MAYBE Vista 64 bit will change that. Use XP 32 bit.

 

[iBorg20181]

Yeah, the reason is because Apple is painfully slow about updating to newer tech when it comes to graphics and monitors.

Apple always is the last big computer maker to get the latest GPU cards, the latest system buses, higher-resolution displays, and now high-end glossy displays.

If you go to any professional video production shop, almost all of the high-end DLP, LCD, and Plasma TV's have glossy displays. The primary reason is for better blacks and higher contrast. LCD's inherently have more trouble producing dark blacks than plasma or DLP and the glossy screen is designed to enhance blacks.

Also the glossy displays have the same color calibration capabilities that the matte finished displays do. Just calibrate the monitor to match your output printer.

I gotta agree with you - that's why I went with the glossy MBP today!

BTW, what does everyone here use to do a proper screen calibration? You can spend a few hundred $$ on calibration equipment/software, but what's really necessary?

TIA

iBorg

 

[digitalbiker]

Haha, I love how people defend their beloved glossy screens.



P.S. I don't think "professionals" edit on plasma, DLP, or LCD TELEVISIONS. Sure they might show off a clip to a client on plasmas but no editing is done on GLOSSY anything.

He isn't just defending it. He is correct. Matte smears the light and results in an opaque finish. The new glossy technology sharpens contrast and enhances the black level.

I added the bit about Plasma, LCD, and DLP HD Television because most of the innovation for display technolgy comes from the high def, home theatre, television production industry. This is dominated by Pioneer, Sony, Samsung, Hatchi, TI, etc. All of the new monitors are going to glossy, especially the large screen HD LCD displays in order to improve black levels.

 

[nevir]

Don't get XP 64 bit! Nobody uses it, thus drivers and support is a pain. MAYBE Vista 64 bit will change that. Use XP 32 bit.

With the Vista betas thus far, Vista 64 is FAR FAR FAR FAR FAR FAR worse than XP 64, in my personal experience

We'll see what happens at release. (not that I'm going to get Vista for anything other than a toy anyway)

 

[nevir]

Any reports of the battery life? I have always been dissapointed with the MacBook Pro battery life.

Considering the hard drive is at a lower RPM - that's less power consumption there. Likewise, everything I've read says the Core 2 Duo has equal or less power consumption (average).

So I doubt battery life will be *much* longer, but probably some (15-30 mins, maybe?)

 

[Aniej]

why the need to eliminate the 7200rpm?

Can anyone explain why there was a need to eliminate the 7200rpm option from the 15'' ? It is one of the upgrades I was looking most forward to in conjunction with core 2 duo. I mean don't get me wrong, I am still thrilled about this addition, but just struggling to understand the subtraction

 

[JackSYi]

He isn't just defending it. He is correct. Matte smears the light and results in an opaque finish. The new glossy technology sharpens contrast and enhances the black level.

Damn, so close, that was worth 10pts too.

The matte/glossy wars have begun. Now on to Final Jeopardy.

P.S. To reiterate: sure HD TELEVISIONS will be glossy to make the picture look sharper. But for professionals who actually EDIT digital content, glossy is really not necessary and most likely not going to happen.

P.P.S. Movie Theaters should really look into going glossy too.