Apple Releases New MacBooks

[Eidorian]

You act as if you were entitled to a big release today. Apple never promised a release. Apple never hinted at one. Apple never even claimed that their MacBook was supposed to have a powerful GPU. If you want a powerful GPU, get a MacBook Pro.

Apple had no reason to upgrade the machine significantly. It is selling quite well, from what I can tell. If and when they start selling significantly less, I'm sure Apple will do something. In fact, I'm sure they already have systems ready - just unreleased.

If you want to get angry at Apple, it makes more sense to get angry over their delay of Leopard. Apple did promise that. And they are not delivering it on time. I'm willing to cut them some slack there - even though I do not believe their sole reason is the iPhone. Or at least, not just the development of the iPhone (more likely the marketing aspect; having two products released at the same time might make them compete for hype).

But no one was entitled to a significant change in lineup. I can see why one might have been hoping for one, but Apple never claimed, promised - or even hinted - that a change would come. There is no reason to feel entitled to one. And the current Mac lineup is satisfactory in general, in my opinion, seeing as my MacBook Pro C2D 2.33 GHz 2GB RAM machine is still faster than any other machine at my home or office which has over 30 computers. It's graphics card is more than acceptable, managing to drive The Sims 2 on a 30" monitor at full resolution and all options checked while barely stuttering. I think it's fast enough.

Sims 2 isn't happening on a MacBook's onboard monitor as it is.

for some reason, people do not seem to understand that that macbooks are no the pro line of computers. they are not supposed to be the fastest machines with the best graphics, otherwise they may as well be 13" macbook pros. 99% of people who buy the macbook do not need santa rosa or superfast gpus. this is a consumer line computer used for doing average tasks that most computer illiterate people do. if you really need a powerful computer, get a macbook pro.

the good news from this though is that if macbooks are this fast, i cannot wait for te new pros! WWDC should be amazing!

$1,999 retail to play WoW or Sims 2 with any reasonable hope on a an Apple laptop.

True. The future looks much better, however. Have you seen WebKit? It is the in-development version of Safari (or at least, of Safari's layout engine). As a web developer, I download its nightly builds. It can be buggy at times, but it can also be significantly faster than the normal Safari and has much fewer memory leaks. Though it does, like your Firefox, reach ~150MB (perhaps 160 - it is hovering at 116 for me at the moment), it doesn't go any further. Normal Safari needs to be reset every so often.

I have tried WebKit Nightlies. Not much luck with RAM conservation over long periods of time lately so I'll stick with FireFox. I'll install some more RAM in my Mac mini tomorrow. 1.5 GB here I come!

 

[mcs37]

If you want to get angry at Apple...

The only reason I'm angry at Apple now is that I can't get the $1,099 model in black.

 

[localoid]

The only reason I'm angry at Apple now is that I can't get the $1,099 model in black.

You want the "old" 2GHz black C2D Macbook for $1099 ? -- go here.

 

[wizard]

Sorry to double post but...well you're wrong.

Well not as wrong as you may think. But first let me tell you a little bit about my history with computers as I've had more than a few. lets see started off with a Commodore Vic 20, then a CPM machine from Heathkit, then a Mac Plus (which I loved), then to a Windows machine which was disgusting way back then. Now I run Linux exclusively and have since Redhat 5.

Now I know Linux limitation pretty well but have been able to put it to good use. That hasn't stopped me from longing for a return to Apple hardware, but for a long time Apple simply had their hardware priced way to high while running on Sloooow processors. The switch to Intel and the maturing of OS/X though has caused me to look again. Frankly I need a portable, but I also understand the value of hardware and this is where Apple really blew it today.

In any event back to the issue of Linux, I can sate that hardware support on Linux is better than the hardware support you get with Apples OS/X in many ways. In my case there really isn't a comparison to Windows as I have zero interest. Sure there are significant limitations with respect to binary video drivers in Linux but I suspect that I can get more video cards to work under Linux than I ever could under OS/X.

In the case of the MB, the special interest here is the GPU that is part of the Santa Rosa chip set. The important part here for Linux is the fact that Intel has opened up the hardware so that drivers can be supported on Linux through open methods. There is very little in the way of lack of support now for Intel hardware. Yes the development is slow but then again Intel's own drivers for Windows still don't support all of the features in its own GPU.

So to sum up Linux is in a better position driver wise than Apple's OS/X.

Linux is a great alternative to Windows but hardware support is the main issue. As Linux supports only open source drivers it has a lot of issues with Nvidia and especially ATI graphics cards.

Well Nvidia cards do work. Closed source drivers but they work and are under constant development.

And well...there are no real mainstream games for it.

Not much of a gamer and probably never will be! But there are games for Linux just as there are for Apple. I gather though that real gamers run under Windows or some sort of purpose specific game box. So the game card really doesn't mean a lot.

Linux is at a point where it's getting very mature and a lot of people seem to realize it, ie DELL. But it still has a way to go.

I have to disagree here. Linux is here today if you can work with in its limitations and focus. For use on the web it is excellent.

Right now I'm runing Kubuntu via VMWare on Windows Vista. So far I like it but when I need to game or do something that only Windows can do then I use Vista. Try it out though. The best of luck.

I will never try out Windows in any form. I may get stuck with it in the future for specific work related things but personally I have no need for it at all. I like the power and stability of Unix/Linux. That is a big attraction with respect to OS/X.

I'm at a point where I want to try new things. I just installed Linux this week. I'm also ready to take the Apple plunge. I think that the MacBook/Pro will be perfect for this but I'm waiting just a little bit longer.

Well it is good that you are waiting. It would be a mistake to plunge into todays MB. The thing that I fear the most is that todays MB release really lowers the bar for the MBP. I have this fear that it will be a limited update too.

Seriously though you should take a plunge into Linux, especially if you work for your dollar. You will get your hardware at a much lower price and that price will include current hardware not stuff that is 12 to 15 months old. With Linux you get really close to having everything that Apple can offer up less the restrictions and controlled environment.

Don't get me wrong there are reasons I was looking at Apple hardware and the MB specifically, but Apple continued manipulation of the market place and its high prices amaze me. I've seen in mentioned in other forums but it looks like Apple has slipped back the mentality of its G4 laptop days. That is offering "updates" every 6 months or so that really offer very little to the average user and at the same time keeping prices very high for relatively poor performance against similar PC hardware.

In a nut shell today sucks.

Dave

 

[2tallyAwesome]

Safari won't give up RAM after prolonged usage. I've had Safari hit over 300 MB of Real Memory usage.

FireFox does hit around 150 MB but it stays there even after hours.

Dude...Seriously...Get your head out of the specs and just USE it.

I'm not even going into my activity moniter, but I can tell you with unequivocal confidence that my computer is more than equiped to do everything I ask of it, and Safari in general is smooth and fast compared to the buggy, crashy, laggy Firefox.

 

[robby818]

You want the "old" 2GHz black C2D Macbook for $1099 ? -- go here.

I was going to hold out for Tiger but at $400 off retail, I am buying now.

Why did they drop it so much? The old and new models are virtually the same. A $300 price drop might be justfied if the new macbook was santa rosa equipped but its not so a smaller price drop would have made sense...not that i'm complaining

 

[Val-kyrie]

I would think it's about time that they remove the price premium for the black MacBook.

Also, I thought that Intel had an updated graphics chip. Why isn't it in these MacBooks?

As I previously posted in another thread, there is no immediate need for better integrated graphics for the Mac OS until the release of Leopard. However, I would have preferred the X3000/X3100 be included in this revision.

 

[localoid]

Maybe, but Core Animation does, and Leopard will be full of it. So I think it makes sense to beef up the GFX abilities ahead of time...

"Eye candy" is the 1st thing I turn off in an OS. It's off on my XP and Vista machines, and anything and everything glitz'sy is turned off in OS X 10.4.x as well...

I use a computer not make money. A PC is not something I'm going to stare at all day while saying "Ooooo... Pretty colors!"

 

[Eidorian]

Dude...Seriously...Get your head out of the specs and just USE it.

I'm not even going into my activity moniter, but I can tell you with unequivocal confidence that my computer is more than equiped to do everything I ask of it, and Safari in general is smooth and fast compared to the buggy, crashy, laggy Firefox.

I do just use it. Until Finder, Dashboard, or Exposé decides to have a grind when I want to open a window, check the weather, or switch applications. OS X decides to Page Out since the GMA 950 is sharing my RAM and front side bus. I've had at least 3 Power Mac G4s (467 MHz Digital Audio to 1.25 GHz MDD) over the past 2 years as my office machine with around 1 to 1.5 GB of RAM and I RARELY had as many interface issues with those older, inferior machines.

In fact I love Safari much more then FireFox. (RSS reader, page rendering, and some of the shortcuts.) At work I hit the wall where I can't afford to have a Mac mini with 2 GB just like my iMac at home.

Given my limited RAM at work and the need to have a lot of helpdesk tabs open, I have to use FireFox to keep OS X from stalling as it waits to compose something.

I stopped caring about Page Outs at work ages ago.

 

[Val-kyrie]

Combo drive? WTF? Get with the times, Apple, even $600 PC laptops come with DVD burners now!

I agree with you, but the ones at Wal-Mart in that price range also come with a Celeron-M or AMD mobile chip--trade offs.

 

[PCMacUser]

Firefox is a dog...maybe you should dump it and go back to safari.

Open right now.

Mail
ichat
Safari
Azureus
Sofa Control
iTunes

..and currently flipping back and forth to dashboard....totally fine!

so yeah...bull.

My iBook (with 1.5Gb RAM) beachballs when I am scanning photographs and using other apps:

Nikon Scan
Firefox
iTunes
Entourage

If I'm not scanning, the computer is fine so I suspect that the Nikon Scan software just doesn't utilise the RAM fully... I don't know. But it's certainly given me an argument to upgrade to a new computer. Sadly, it's unlikely to be the Macbook. A MBP would be great, but it's too expensive with its current specs. Here's hoping for June!

 

[localoid]

... In a nut shell today sucks.

If today's glass seems only "half-full," then maybe you should try starting out with a smaller glass at the beginning of each day.

 

[PCMacUser]

Dude...Seriously...Get your head out of the specs and just USE it.

I'm not even going into my activity moniter, but I can tell you with unequivocal confidence that my computer is more than equiped to do everything I ask of it, and Safari in general is smooth and fast compared to the buggy, crashy, laggy Firefox.

Except for the dodgy Firefox 2.0.0 release (which I quickly removed from my system), I can honestly say that Firefox has never, ever crashed on my iBook. Not once. I like it because it's the same browser I prefer to use on a PC. Having some standardisation between platforms is rather nice for a change, don't you think?

 

[Val-kyrie]

As someone who has been waiting for about a year for a decent GPU in a MB to buy his first Mac I am severely pissed off.

Why are Apple making the MB so processor powerful while making so pathetic in terms of it's GPU?

For the next six months the MB will be poor compared to every other laptop, as every other one will have SR. Heck, the SR CPUs are cheaper than the old ones so they could've put in a 2.0 and 2.2.

I will bet Apple is using the 1st gen Merom leftover chips (2.0 and 2.16 GHz) in the current revision of the MB. The MBPs will get the 2nd gen Merom chips with architectural tweaks and the new LED backlight for certain. These chips will likely be spec'd at 2.2 and 2.4. Thus Apple maintains the distinction in GHz and while the MB looks good on paper, it will trail the MBP more significantly than the last revision because instead of the MB and MBP using the same chip the MB will use the older chip architecture.

 

[Eidorian]

Except for the dodgy Firefox 2.0.0 release (which I quickly removed from my system), I can honestly say that Firefox has never, ever crashed on my iBook. Not once. I like it because it's the same browser I prefer to use on a PC. Having some standardisation between platforms is rather nice for a change, don't you think?

I know Safari hates HP's configuration pages too. Try it now!

I hop between Safari and FireFox for what I'm doing. Like right now I need tab management galore so I'm in FireFox. FireFox is my forum posting browser and Safari handles everything else.

I live in Forum Spy too. Don't run it in Safari. I warned you!

 

[CoreWeb]

Sims 2 isn't happening on a MacBook's onboard monitor as it is.

$1,999 retail to play WoW or Sims 2 with any reasonable hope on a an Apple laptop.

But why should an entry-level laptop be used by a gamer? That was my point - that if one needs a more powerful graphics card, they should be willing to buy a MacBook Pro. A MacBook is more of an entry-level laptop. Neither the MacBook Pro nor the MacBook, however, are truly gamer's laptops (granted, I wouldn't know, as I'm not a big-time gamer.)

 

[Eidorian]

But why should an entry-level laptop be used by a gamer? That was my point - that if one needs a more powerful graphics card, they should be willing to buy a MacBook Pro. A MacBook is more of an entry-level laptop. Neither the MacBook Pro nor the MacBook, however, are truly gamer's laptops (granted, I wouldn't know, as I'm not a big-time gamer.)

Sims 2 is a gamer's game? When did this happen?

Sims 2 and Lego Star Wars are my casual gamer benchmarks. WoW is tossed in for good measure sometimes as well. I've had to tell a lot of Windows users that they can't run their kids games due to crappy integrated graphics. (Lego Star Wars brought a grandmother almost to tears.)

They know how to install a video card, right? Oh wait it's a laptop.

 

[Val-kyrie]

Faster and cheaper - I smell a rat. They have thrown faster chips into the old MB shells to shift units before they go fully LED across the range in June.

Although the MBP will likely be updated to LED in June, I wouldn't expect LED across all laptop lines until the hardware revision alongside/after Leopard. That is when I expect the MB to receive LED backlighting, and not before then.

 

[wizard]

What I think we have here is an example of ignorance of electronic technology and maybe a bit of what Santa Rosa offers. So I will try to sway your opinion.

for some reason, people do not seem to understand that that macbooks are no the pro line of computers. they are not supposed to be the fastest machines with the best graphics, otherwise they may as well be 13" macbook pros.

Yep I think everybody in this thread understands that. I also think everyone here understands that the current GPU sucks big time and in fact is worst than the one it replaced on the old G4 MB. Mind you no body is asking for a stand alone high performance GPU. All we are asking for is the current standard in integrated GPU's from Intel. While the GPU in Santa Rosa will be an improvement nobody expects blazing performance or even remote competition with the MBP. On the other hand I don't think it is to much to expect that the machine perform significantly better than the old G4 MB.

What the X3100 offers is better not lazing improvements to video performance, improvements to video decoding and a few other enhancements. It is not competition for Nvidia or ATI's best by any means.

99% of people who buy the macbook do not need santa rosa or superfast gpus. this is a consumer line computer used for doing average tasks that most computer illiterate people do. if you really need a powerful computer, get a macbook pro.

That is so wrong as to be ridiculous. People buying consumer hardware expect to get modern components for their money when buying new hardware. If I wanted an antique I'd go down to the used computer store.

In any event Santa Rosa does have features that many consumers will find very beneficial. One of the most significant is the ability to save power, which most consumers find desirable. But again the GPU isn't super fast it is simply an improvement over what is in the MB and might bring us back to G4 level of performance.

the good news from this though is that if macbooks are this fast, i cannot wait for te new pros! WWDC should be amazing!

This is totally blowing my mind you keep talking about how fast these machines are yet there was little done of significance to speed them up. 160 MEGA Hz on a 2 GHz processor, that will really get people dancing in the streets. This is simply an update for suckers.

I actually have the opposite reaction to what the MBP will look like. This introduction actually lowers the bar, Apple will have to do very little to improve on the MBP now. We can all hope for he best but I'm not as hopeful as I would have been if this was done right.

Dave

 

[macdragonfl]

Macbooks will get another update this year

Apple would never release Santa Rosa MacBooks first. It is not the way the company works. We that have been using Macs for a while know that. This update allows them to clear out the MacBook Pro parts bin. Apple does the same thing with the Mini. They use it to clear out old MacBook parts when it is updated. Macbook Pro will be updated first. Maybe even the Ultra Portable will come out. Then in August or September the Santa Rosa Macbooks will come out. I did not make the rules Apple did. So all of you newbies that are upset, calm down and understand Macbook is Apple's base laptop. It will always be a bit behind MacBook Pro and always lack the bells and whistles. It is the price you pay to use OS X. You can argue specs from all of the other companies. The fastest parts in the world and then run Vista? That should cost you the 15% speed increase if your lucky answering all of the messages and popups and problems.

 

[CoreWeb]

"Eye candy" is the 1st thing I turn off in an OS. It's off on my XP and Vista machines, and anything and everything glitz'sy is turned off in OS X 10.4.x as well...

I use a computer not make money. A PC is not something I'm going to stare at all day while saying "Ooooo... Pretty colors!"

But sometimes eye candy can also be useful. Simple, quick, unobtrusive animations can make a computer easier on the eyes. For instance, the Genie Effect allows you to note very easily where on the dock the window is going - helpful if you have plenty of windows. It, versus the scale, may also help act as a metaphor of "stashing away."

Same goes for just nice-looking skins. It helps users see things more easily. The problem is, too many companies add obtrusive effects that while pretty, end up simply slowing things down. Unobtrusive, though useful, effects, are a good thing, as is good artwork for the OS skin. (Granted, this is all my opinion)

 

[CoreWeb]

Sims 2 is a gamer's game? When did this happen?

Sims 2 and Lego Star Wars are my casual gamer benchmarks. WoW is tossed in for good measure sometimes as well. I've had to tell a lot of Windows users that they can't run their kids games due to crappy integrated graphics. (Lego Star Wars brought a grandmother almost to tears.)

They know how to install a video card, right? Oh wait it's a laptop.

Okay, but how well would these games have run had they bought a MacBook Pro instead of a MacBook?

 

[Eidorian]

Okay, but how well would these games have run had they bought a MacBook Pro instead of a MacBook?

I have Sims 2 running at 1280 x 800 windowed with all the settings high. It runs just fine (30 fps or higher) unless I use some poly crazy custom neighborhood buildings. (This is on my iMac ya' know.)

I should get Sims 2: Pets for multi-threaded OpenGL via the patch.

Hay guys lets see what 166.66 MHz doez. (Core Duo I know...)

 

[Val-kyrie]

This is crazy, the Black MB now has a bigger hard drive and a faster superdrive than the 15" MBP, a model that costs hundreds of pounds more. Even the middle MB has a faster superdrive and the same hdd.

Wait until June. The Force will come into balance then young Padawan--and even shift back toward the Light Side. Seriously, Steve is going to make a big deal out of the new MBP in June.

 

[vagarach]

Well, at least apple is now doing without the flogging of the G4 processor which had long been left behind (speed wise) by the pc world. Before, if you bought an overpriced and underpowered (seriously so) G4 ibook or powerbook, you were stuck with OSX or PPC linux on non-x86 architecture. When you switched, you switched.

The GMA950 is very common, and is most often replaced by a dedicated nvidia Go7400, and never in a 1" thick form factor, and few PC manufacturers have 2Ghz C2D notebooks at the $1249 CDN price point. For $1500 CDN Dell has the XPS M1210 12" portable with these specs:

Intel® Core™ 2 Duo T7200 (2.00GHz, 4MB L2 Cache, 667 MHz FSB)
Genuine Windows Vista™ Home Premium
Integrated Webcam and Mobile Broadband Antenna
1GB Shared Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 667MHz (2 Dimms)
120GB 5400RPM SATA Hard Drive
8x CD/DVD burner (DVD+/-RW) with double-layer DVD+R write capability
Free Upgrade to 256MB NVIDIA GeForce Go 7400 TurboCache - $130 Value
53 WHr 6-cell Lithium Ion Primary Battery

Comparing to the middle tier macbook ($1449), the superdrive is 2x faster, and it has dedicated graphics, but no 802.11n, and a smaller screen.

Now, running cpu intensive tasks, the macbook and this dell will be very, very evenly matched. Whereas in the past you would spend this same $1500 and get a slow dark-ages machine, you now get proper performance, so there are great strides being made here.

I keep thinking "uugghh look at that macbook speedbump. pathetic", and then remember that any macbook would still completely trounce my dell inspiron 600m with 1.86Ghz Pentium M, which is managing quite ok even nowadays (well, apart from trying to run vista, that is).

I am really, really waiting for those new MBPs to come out soon!