Apple Releases the MacBook Pro

[zync]

Still comes down to the fact that you have a choice - if you don't want to have the extra thing to carry around and have the possibility of using the drive in the field - leave the drive in the machine. If it's a Core Duo machine, you are still talking ballpark same battery life as the MBP. I can understand why you may not choose to utilise it, I still don't understand why you *hate* it though.

Even then, you could just get a PC without that functionality. I'm not advocating that these choices should be at the expense of the current MBP model - I'm just saying that it's a good thing about the PC market that these choices exist, and I wish we had the same freedom with Apple. You can't fit the entire computer market into 4 boxes - but as things stand, Apple/OS X can only take market share from the part of the market that can be forced into 4 boxes.

I think Apple makes the choice simpler. Nearly everything that they offer is a great machine. As for the select bay, I had a Dell that did it and I did not like how it worked. It was a hassle to carry drives around and it was a hassle to switch them out. I like my computers to have everything I need right there. My PowerBook was the first computer to achieve that.

Oh, I grant you programs don't remove themselves correctly, and that can cause problems (same can be said of OS X though - particularly as applications can have installers that shove things in the library, but often don't have uninstallers that remove those items). That can cause things to stop working - not necessarily slow things down.

But it's still pretty quick to use the registry - simple test is to fire up the registry editor... even on pretty naffed up machines, it's still fast to navigate the registry (pretty much instantaneous). Only searching through the registry is slow, but then applications don't do that - they access named keys.

Yes, you can accumulate crap and slow down Windows over time. You can do that on OS X too. What you do have on Windows is a lot more idiots that install shedloads of crap without realising that they are naffing up their system.

The problem is that it is annoying to have to do that.

Well, in a (wider) sense yes. You could just as easily hate Apple for using (and forking) KHTML in Safari - it may be standards based, but it's still another rendering engine getting significant market share, it's still something else that may have a bug, etc.

Apple has so far adhered to standards. On most browsers that have shoddy support for standards, it's easy to work around them. Internet Explorer not only has the worst support for standards out of current browsers, but it also makes workarounds difficult between it's latest few versions. And don't even mention the Mac version, that is both better and worse than its windows counterpart.

The fact is that there are things I don't like about all of the platforms that exist. Each one also has it's unique benefits too.

I definitely concur. I'm glad that this discussion is shaping up nicely.

It's all about compromise, and by the end of the year, Windows will present me with the fewest compromises.

True, but I think you'll find it the other way round. They'll present you with the fewest compromises—on their end of course

 

[mrfop]

I mostly agree, and I'm sure many others feel the same

I'm simultaneously impressed and disappointed. The speed boost is mind-boggling. And the MBP is (theoretically) 4 to 5 times faster than the 1.67GHz PBs. My 15" PB is about 2 and a half years old and only 1GHz. So the speed on the MBPs blows this old guy out of the water.

The built-in isight is ugly and strikes me as sortof tacky. From Apple's point of view, it makes all the sense in the world to include it. The only complaint anyone could have had about Apple's video-conferencing technology was that nobody used it. Now that everybody with an iBook or an MBP is going to have an iSight (whether they want one or not), the usage of iChat's video-conferencing features is going to skyrocket. I still think it's ugly and unnecessary, but if I had one, I'm sure I'd use it.

Now the real complaints: All the features omitted seem to reflect a trend in Apple's recent products. I recently had to buy a new (video) ipod, because my old ipod broke. I'm generally happy with the thing, but I also had no complaints about my old (and comparatively clunky 3G ipod). What irritates me about the new ipod (and the new MBP) is the omission of firewire support in the name of creating a thinner product. Don't get me wrong, thin is great. But i never had a problem with the size of my older 3G ipod, and i certainly would have preferred the video ipods be a little bit thicker and maintain firewire support. Similarly, I'd be much happier if the MBP were say 1.1 inches thick or even 1.2 inches thick if that meant maintaining features like firewire 800, 8x superdrive, screen resolution, built in modem, etc., etc. Thin is great, no doubt, but how many features are they going to declare "unnecessary" in the name of slimming things down further? Next they'll be shipping 0.2 inch thick PBs/MBPs that have no displays or keypads because those features are too thick.

I certainly wouldn't mind if somebody handed me a new MBP, but I'm also not racing to buy one. It's getting to be about time to replace this PB (it's still titanium! remember those, guys?), and it's seen better days. Still the first generation of MBP is not gonna cut it. Maybe by the second version they'll work out details like battery life, screen resolution, superdrive, and so on. Hell, maybe they'll figure out how to make that IR remote bluetooth by then, too, and get rid of the ugly IR sensor. It looks like they're off to a pretty good start, but I've got my fingers crossed for Rev B.

Yes absurdio, Apple have brought us an interesting product, like we knew they would, but is it a great product - like the iPod was, eventually - no. If the MacBook Pro had included a dual-layer DVD writer, and featured a decent battery life, then I for one would have been sold. As it is, I'm holding my breath.

The iPod was a premium product when it was released - we had to pay more for the Pod than other MP3 players - but we did, because it was not only the best, it was the future. As a result Apple changed the face of music/audio consumption on planet earth.

Apple could do the same with the MacBook Pro, they should put in everything we're all moaning about on here - Dual-layer (for now, until Blu-ray or whatever), Firewire 800 (if it really does help pro's), a pcmcia card that is backwards compatible (not smaller!) and other options (i.e. no iSight = and the extra pixels in exchange!), oh and of course ... a bloody good battery. They could also be more helpful regarding Mac's running Windows (Vista - I doubt earlier XP versions will be compatible with the OSX/intel setup?). OSX could then be a standalone product, complimentary to windows - which we all need to use in business (OSX could be used for online work ... virus free). Heaven forbid, perhaps OSX could be sold to PC users even??? I can feel the cat amongst the pidgeons on that one!!!

I think Apple have got their foot in the door of the core duo led revolution that could see many more of us on laptops; but they need to smash down the door, and show the rest of the market why so many of us have faith in their name.

 

[spinal1]

What Comp USA was this? The website still lists it as $1999 and I just called my local store and they confirmed that's the going price.

I was going to buy one tomorrow since they are offering 48 months no interest, but I don't want to get hosed if they're going to be knocking $500 off the price in a week.

This was in Rockville, MD. There were 2 signs in front of the machine, indicating two markdowns, or "Manager's Specials." If my memory serves me, the first reduction was to $1800 indicated by a red and white sign, and the second was to $1500 indicated by a yellow and black sign. Again I'm rounding off the price. I don't know anything about Apple's pricing and marketing, but I can speculate as to a couple of reasons why this retailer has dropped its price on the PB 15" so dramatically:

1. They have no shelf space. The Apple products are in one short aisle, placed closely together. I don't see room for them to have the MBP side by side with the PB. Perhaps they want to phase out sales of the PB 15". Perhaps no one has been buying it at the old price since the MBP was announced. They may have other inventory issues. The price was listed as a "manager's special" at this store, so it may not be happening company-wide.

2. The demand for the PB 15" must be dropping. For any retailer, if the supplier comes out with a new product with a splashy intro, the product it's replacing, even if still being sold, is typically going to be in lower demand. For example, what would happen if Mazda were selling the RX-8 through 2005 with a Wankel Rotary engine, and the rest of the auto industry uses the piston engine, and then Mazda announced that for 2006 it will sell a new RX-8 that has a piston engine, is faster than the previous model, gets better gas mileage, has sleeker looks, and a built-in rear-view camera for parking, but that it will still sell the old RX-8 at the same price as before for those who like the Wankel. Sure, there might be some well-informed Wankel die-hards, who exchange info. in discussion forums, who would continue to buy the old car because they believe the Wankel is a better engine, and maybe it is. But most folks won't know any better and will automatically view the new car as better. There's no way these folks would buy the old model at the same price as before, especially since they're not just looking at Mazdas but at competing cars. Dealers who want to move the old cars will have to drop the price. This is especially true for dealers who sell many other cars that compete directly with the Mazda, as CompUSA does with laptops.

Whether or not Apple drops the price of the PB to retailers is an open question, but I think they'd be crazy not to. Does Apple publish current and recent sales figures? If so, they would verify whether this guess about demand for the PB 15" is correct.

 

[blissed]

atleast

atleast they didn't give us a combo drive option this year... sheesh

 

[absurdio]

Originally Posted by Piarco75
Salling Clicker and either a Sony Ericsson or Nokia mobile.
Its fantastic - full iTunes functionality (including the artwork of the playing track), PowerPoint/Keynote, DVD Player, desktop (acts like a mouse) and other fun stuff. All over BT.

Oh, that just breaks my little heart. My phone's the Motorolla E815. It's got bluetooth, but thanks to Verizon, it's a pretty crippled bluetooth. I'm aware that people have figured out ways to do "seem edits" or some such thing to make the bluetooth actually useful on the phone, but I'm pretty inept and even more terrified, so unless someone wants to do it for me, it looks like i'm out of luck. Oh well. No remote for me, I guess. Technology leaves me behind once again. *sigh*

Originally Posted by mrfop
Apple could do the same with the MacBook Pro, they should put in everything we're all moaning about on here - Dual-layer (for now, until Blu-ray or whatever), Firewire 800 (if it really does help pro's), a pcmcia card that is backwards compatible (not smaller!) and other options (i.e. no iSight = and the extra pixels in exchange!), oh and of course ... a bloody good battery.

Exactly. No doubt about it, the MBP looks pretty sexy. But I'd gladly have it be a couple tenths of an inch thicker in exchange for a longer battery life, DL superdrive, and FW 800. Unfortunately, it seems like the battle between form and function is being won by form this time around.

 

[grahamtriggs]

I think Apple makes the choice simpler. Nearly everything that they offer is a great machine. As for the select bay, I had a Dell that did it and I did not like how it worked. It was a hassle to carry drives around and it was a hassle to switch them out. I like my computers to have everything I need right there. My PowerBook was the first computer to achieve that.

Again, still don't follow you - no-one is forcing you to carry drives around and/or switch them out. There are many PC laptops with swappable drive bays that (with the DVD drive installed) contain everything bar a backlit keyboard that the MBP does (including battery life), so there is no need to swap drives (although there may be rare occassions - hardware failure, or occassional need for increased battery life - where the ability to do so is beneficial).

Of course, I can accept that an older laptop you had may have been so limited that your experience of drive bays at that time was necessarily negative, but that doesn't mean it is true of all - or perhaps any - laptops that are available today.

But, if you can get an additional benefit from drive not being swappable - such as the thickness - then great, I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that. I just think you are being a little irrational in your opinion of a feature, when what you seem to have is a bad experience of a product.

(re: registry) The problem is that it is annoying to have to do that.

Have to do what? My post mentioned nothing that you *have* to do - as in my view there isn't anything that you have to do. I only mentioned one thing that you could do, that would actually show that what you are assuming to be a problem, isn't.

Apple has so far adhered to standards. On most browsers that have shoddy support for standards, it's easy to work around them. Internet Explorer not only has the worst support for standards out of current browsers, but it also makes workarounds difficult between it's latest few versions. And don't even mention the Mac version, that is both better and worse than its windows counterpart.

Well, yes they've got a good standards based implementation of HTML/CSS. Shame that the way they went about it blew up into a KHTML vs. WebKit argument. Also a bit of a shame that their standards based approach doesn't quite extend to RSS (note recent comments about photocasting).

And I quite agree about IE's standards 'support' - but as a web developer for the last 9 years, I've had more problems in Netscape/Mozilla incompatabilities between versions than I have with IE (although nowhere near as many as trying to get something to work on IE and Netscape and Opera, etc.)

True, but I think you'll find it the other way round. They'll present you with the fewest compromises—on their end of course

That's exactly the problem I have with Apple... if I want to sync my contacts/calendar with my phone, it has to be one they support with iSync - which is a problem when you have to deal with network contracts, etc. (not that I have a problem with iSync in general, if only they would update it once in a while - or make it possible / easier for third parties to support additional devices). Or how about choice of media management/serving/portable media player? (OK, iPod is great, but iTunes has a number of practical problems).

Now, if you take the iSync problem, it's not entirely clear if Apple are prohibiting third party involvement, or if there is just a lack of interest (certainly third parties could provide an alternative if they desired). But ultimately, the distinction is arbitrary.

 

[Photorun]

In many cases, Windows is actually better (how many times have you accidentally closed the wrong application in MacOS because it has the focus although all windows are minimised, or had apps running in the background consuming memory because you closed the window and not the app?). Sure, Mac has the advantage of GPU acceleration and Expose - but that gap will be closed with Vista, and it's hard to see any practical benefit that can be added.

Stability isn't really an issue worth talking about any more (both OSes can be stable/unstable depending on how you treat them). And the other important area is security - which Windows has already made some progress on, and the big issue user access/rights should also be dealt with in Vista (in much the same way as OSX). Sure, the MS apps - IE, etc. - may still have issues, but since when did you *have* to use the MS application stack?

Which basically means that if Vista delivers it's promises, both it and OS X will do everything I would want / need from an OS for the foreseeable future.

I love this guy! A humor writer, right here on Macrumors.com... exciting stuff. The stuff you wrote about Vista, stability and security, that was HYSTERICAL! I almost rolled out of my chair, wow! I mean, some humorists use hyperbole but you... you sir are a comedic genius!

 

[GregA]

if I want to sync my contacts/calendar with my phone, it has to be one they support with iSync <snip>

it's not entirely clear if Apple are prohibiting third party involvement, or if there is just a lack of interest

It'd be great to have 3rd party involvement. If Apple allowed a phone or PDA maker to write their own interface that'd be great. And even more useful, allow a competitor to "Address Book" on OSX to sync with mobiles via iSync too.

edit: I guess that's the problem with wanting to do all things yourself - there's a limit to how much you can actually accomplish.

 

[grahamtriggs]

edit: I guess that's the problem with wanting to do all things yourself - there's a limit to how much you can actually accomplish.

There is a limit - that is sort of an acceptable point when it comes to supporting new manufacturers, etc. But when manufacturers release new phones and it the sync profile is identical to previous hardware, it's pretty poor that Apple take so long to get around to updating some config + graphics.

 

[zync]

Again, still don't follow you - no-one is forcing you to carry drives around and/or switch them out. There are many PC laptops with swappable drive bays that (with the DVD drive installed) contain everything bar a backlit keyboard that the MBP does (including battery life), so there is no need to swap drives (although there may be rare occassions - hardware failure, or occassional need for increased battery life - where the ability to do so is beneficial).

Of course, I can accept that an older laptop you had may have been so limited that your experience of drive bays at that time was necessarily negative, but that doesn't mean it is true of all - or perhaps any - laptops that are available today.

But, if you can get an additional benefit from drive not being swappable - such as the thickness - then great, I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that. I just think you are being a little irrational in your opinion of a feature, when what you seem to have is a bad experience of a product.

It's mostly a case of taking the extra battery because you don't anticipate needing the DVD-RW. All the batteries in the world aren't going to help you in that situation. That's what I'm talking about. And yes, of course if the DVD-RW is integrated and you don't have enough battery to power it, that's another problem. It works both ways. I like my machine to be solid, and I don't want to have to fuddle with drives. It's a matter of opinion. They're great if you want them. For me, all I see is that they can be used for an extra battery. I don't think it's worth the extra cost due to engineering.

Have to do what? My post mentioned nothing that you *have* to do - as in my view there isn't anything that you have to do. I only mentioned one thing that you could do, that would actually show that what you are assuming to be a problem, isn't.

Well, yes, you can run a windows system with a dirty registry. If you like a slow computer, let it stagnate

Well, yes they've got a good standards based implementation of HTML/CSS. Shame that the way they went about it blew up into a KHTML vs. WebKit argument. Also a bit of a shame that their standards based approach doesn't quite extend to RSS (note recent comments about photocasting).

That has nothing to do with Safari, and Safari has nothing to do with the MBP anyway

And I quite agree about IE's standards 'support' - but as a web developer for the last 9 years, I've had more problems in Netscape/Mozilla incompatabilities between versions than I have with IE (although nowhere near as many as trying to get something to work on IE and Netscape and Opera, etc.)

I feel ya. I've been coding for about the same time.

That's exactly the problem I have with Apple... if I want to sync my contacts/calendar with my phone, it has to be one they support with iSync - which is a problem when you have to deal with network contracts, etc. (not that I have a problem with iSync in general, if only they would update it once in a while - or make it possible / easier for third parties to support additional devices). Or how about choice of media management/serving/portable media player? (OK, iPod is great, but iTunes has a number of practical problems).

Now, if you take the iSync problem, it's not entirely clear if Apple are prohibiting third party involvement, or if there is just a lack of interest (certainly third parties could provide an alternative if they desired). But ultimately, the distinction is arbitrary.

That I have nothing for. My phone works. I know that OS X's phone representation is shoddy, but nothing is perfect. Still, I'd rather have a good computer that can't sync, than a box running windows that can. Also, they do update iSync rather frequently. My guess though, is that they only add newer phones. As for people who run with Sprint/Verizon/whatever, realize that you're going to get crappy bluetooth. Sorry, those carriers are just bastards trying to get more money out of you with EVDO cards for computers—which incidently won't run in the MBP due to its expresscard slot—so that you can connect to the internet. If you could use your bluetooth phone as a modem, then how could they make money? Also, I've never been able to get my phone to work as a bluetooth modem, but I think that's because I used to have AOL which didn't support PPP.

 

[grahamtriggs]

I love this guy! A humor writer, right here on Macrumors.com... exciting stuff. The stuff you wrote about Vista, stability and security, that was HYSTERICAL! I almost rolled out of my chair, wow! I mean, some humorists use hyperbole but you... you sir are a comedic genius!

The point about stability is true - I've never had XP crash apart from a bad device driver, and I have to use it all day at work. I've used OS X at home for 3 years, and thanks to a bad device driver have had kernel panics.

I've had badly written programmes on both systems force me to reboot the system. So as far as I see it, stability is pretty much tied. (NB: I'm a web developer, and we run most of our web servers on IIS - now those servers do get rebooted quite frequently, but that is due to IIS / COM applications sucking up the resources - not directly a problem with the OS itself).

As for security, that is partly speculation. Note I did say *if* they deliver on the touted features. You do of course realise that there are two main reasons for the security of MacOS X:

1) The small market share, resulting in fewer people targetting the OS.

2) The restricted normal user priveleges / user escalation to run potentially damaging applications.

Windows isn't about to deliberately lose it's market share, but Vista *is* set to gain the restricted user rights that OS X enjoys. *If* (and I mean if) it is done correctly, that goes along way to sorting out security issues. As will the two-way firewall (the firewall in OS X is only one way).

Go and look at the security features they are putting in to Vista - if they pull it off, there really isn't much more you could do. Of course it will still get attacked - NO OS IS 100% SECURE, and that applies equally to OS X.

 

[grahamtriggs]

It's mostly a case of taking the extra battery because you don't anticipate needing the DVD-RW. All the batteries in the world aren't going to help you in that situation. That's what I'm talking about. And yes, of course if the DVD-RW is integrated and you don't have enough battery to power it, that's another problem. It works both ways. I like my machine to be solid, and I don't want to have to fuddle with drives. It's a matter of opinion. They're great if you want them. For me, all I see is that they can be used for an extra battery. I don't think it's worth the extra cost due to engineering.

This is my last post on the subject as we are going in circles. Right now, you can get Intel Core Duo based PC laptops that have a swappable drive bay, that get the same (or better) battery life as the MBP, with a DL DVD burner installed in the drive bay - and they are *cheaper*.

All this talk about carrying extra drives / batteries because of this, that or the other implies that you would be in a worse position in terms of functionality (by leaving the drive at home) or battery life (if you don't take the battery) - which, for many models simply is not true.

Well, yes, you can run a windows system with a dirty registry. If you like a slow computer, let it stagnate

Sorry, but this is FUD. It can be proven that registry crud does not have the dramatic effects that you are talking about. (It can also be proven that a clean install of OS X will be more responsive than one that has been left to stagnate - clearly can't be the registry causing that, right).

I'm not saying that you are wrong that the OS can / will slow down over time, but the level to which you claiming and the reasons for it are wrong (at least when used with a modicum of common sense and understanding).

That I have nothing for. My phone works. I know that OS X's phone representation is shoddy, but nothing is perfect. Still, I'd rather have a good computer that can't sync, than a box running windows that can.

To an extent, I'm with you... if I had to run anything prior to XP SP2, then it's OS X all the way. XP SP2/MCE is just about acceptable, and Vista (should) make a distinction largely meaningless.

And sync is a pretty crucial feature for me - I may have a laptop out of convenience, doesn't mean that I always want to carry it with me. And I want backups of SIM, etc.

Also, they do update iSync rather frequently. My guess though, is that they only add newer phones.

No they don't - 6 updates in over 40 months is not a lot. There should be at least 1 update every month, providing there is at least one new phone that they can support. Bear in mind that a number of phones get released for which all that is needed is a config change (take the Sony's for example). And if they can't / won't do that, they should make it possible and encourage other people to provide support quickly.

If you could use your bluetooth phone as a modem, then how could they make money? Also, I've never been able to get my phone to work as a bluetooth modem, but I think that's because I used to have AOL which didn't support PPP.

Because you pay for the data being transferred? Oh, I've managed to get my Sony to work as a bluetooth modem, but only with some third party scripts and a lot of trial and error. Which, considering it is recognised by the OS / iSync is, quite frankly, ridiculous. Why the hell doesn't the OS just set up the phone as a bluetooth modem when it recognises it - it surely can't be that hard. So much for the touted ease of use of the Mac...

 

[zync]

This is my last post on the subject as we are going in circles. Right now, you can get Intel Core Duo based PC laptops that have a swappable drive bay, that get the same (or better) battery life as the MBP, with a DL DVD burner installed in the drive bay - and they are *cheaper*.

All this talk about carrying extra drives / batteries because of this, that or the other implies that you would be in a worse position in terms of functionality (by leaving the drive at home) or battery life (if you don't take the battery) - which, for many models simply is not true.

I agree that we are going around in circles. My point is simply that if I had the select bay and two batteries, I'd be in a jam because I'd never want to take the DVD drive with me and when I would eventually need it, I wouldn't have it with me.

Also, I didn't mean that the MBP is cheaper than another select bay computer. I meant that a MBP as it is now would be cheaper than a MBP with a select bay because of the extra engineering required. Also, knowing Apple, they'd have to come up with some sort of really inventive way of switching drives in the bay, especially since the models I'm used to break easily. You have no idea how many select bay latches I've fixed. And it would most definitely not be thin, at least not as thin as a MBP.

Sorry, but this is FUD. It can be proven that registry crud does not have the dramatic effects that you are talking about. (It can also be proven that a clean install of OS X will be more responsive than one that has been left to stagnate - clearly can't be the registry causing that, right).

I'm not saying that you are wrong that the OS can / will slow down over time, but the level to which you claiming and the reasons for it are wrong (at least when used with a modicum of common sense and understanding).

I simply disagree.

To an extent, I'm with you... if I had to run anything prior to XP SP2, then it's OS X all the way. XP SP2/MCE is just about acceptable, and Vista (should) make a distinction largely meaningless.

And sync is a pretty crucial feature for me - I may have a laptop out of convenience, doesn't mean that I always want to carry it with me. And I want backups of SIM, etc.

I never said that XP is not a good OS. I just don't think it is as good as OS X. It comes down to a lot of things that I've really only noticed after having a PowerBook and having to do work on windows PCs away from it. At one of the places I work we have an XP box and an eMac. I usually do most of my work on the XP box because it's where a lot of the files originate and it renders faster (I'm doing video). However I always wish I had expose or some other feature that OS X has, and it's probably to the point that missing those features causes me a lot of time—probably equal to the little bit extra it takes the eMac to function.

I will say a lot of good for that eMac though. Those things are workhorses. It's nearly as fast as the dual 3.2GHz VAIO we have. The VAIO has 2GB of RAM and the eMac is, I think, 1.5GHz with only 1GB of RAM.

That said I wish our G5 wasn't connected to the mixing board

No they don't - 6 updates in over 40 months is not a lot. There should be at least 1 update every month, providing there is at least one new phone that they can support. Bear in mind that a number of phones get released for which all that is needed is a config change (take the Sony's for example). And if they can't / won't do that, they should make it possible and encourage other people to provide support quickly.

Well, we are just assuming that they're not making it open to vendors. iSync updates themselves usually occur with every minor OS update. Anyway, I'm not sure about how often the phone specific updates occur. I've had the same phone for all the time I've had my PowerBook.

Because you pay for the data being transferred? Oh, I've managed to get my Sony to work as a bluetooth modem, but only with some third party scripts and a lot of trial and error. Which, considering it is recognised by the OS / iSync is, quite frankly, ridiculous. Why the hell doesn't the OS just set up the phone as a bluetooth modem when it recognises it - it surely can't be that hard. So much for the touted ease of use of the Mac...

That's only if you use GPRS. That's why they're annoyed. If you use your phone as just a modem which dials up for internet access, it only costs you minutes and most of us have to many to use anymore, or free nights and weekends. For the record, I think it worked on my phone with little hassle but I couldn't get it to work at the time because AOL doesn't use PPP. Now that I have roadrunner, I could use their dial-up while I'm in a place with no internet connection however rare that may be.

 

[grahamtriggs]

if I had the select bay and two batteries, I'd be in a jam because I'd never want to take the DVD drive with me and when I would eventually need it, I wouldn't have it with me.

This is where we differ - I would always have the DVD drive in the bay, unless I foresaw the need for extra battery life, and I was pretty certain I wouldn't need the extra battery. Hence it's an option that might be useful, but doesn't compromise me generally.

Also, I didn't mean that the MBP is cheaper than another select bay computer. I meant that a MBP as it is now would be cheaper than a MBP with a select bay because of the extra engineering required. Also, knowing Apple, they'd have to come up with some sort of really inventive way of switching drives in the bay, especially since the models I'm used to break easily. You have no idea how many select bay latches I've fixed. And it would most definitely not be thin, at least not as thin as a MBP.

Interesting point about the latches, but it seems to be the you felt that you had to make use of it because it was there, rather than making use of it only when you had to. And you are probably right about the thickness, but I don't believe it would need to be as thick as PC laptops.

Besides which, the MBP is too thin anyway - as it has meant compromising the performance of the DVD drive. If there was a greater benefit I might not mind, but I refuse to accept the loss of useful functionality for (mostly)aesthetic reasons.

I never said that XP is not a good OS. I just don't think it is as good as OS X.

I don't think it is as good as OS X either. But I'm not convinced that the benefits of OS X are worth the huge premium of an MBP over similar PC hardware, and then there is Vista which will reduce the benefits of OS X still further.

However I always wish I had expose or some other feature that OS X has, and it's probably to the point that missing those features causes me a lot of time—probably equal to the little bit extra it takes the eMac to function.

Quite a few of the features of OS X you can add on to XP for no cost - Yahoo! Widgets, Copernic / Google Desktop search engines. And then Vista will build most of these into the OS, including something a little Expose like. (Although I only ever use Expose for quick access to the desktop - I always find switching apps with cmd+Tab more efficient as you don't have to watch the animation, recognise the window you want, move your hand to use the mouse/trackpad).

I will say a lot of good for that eMac though. Those things are workhorses. It's nearly as fast as the dual 3.2GHz VAIO we have. The VAIO has 2GB of RAM and the eMac is, I think, 1.5GHz with only 1GB of RAM.

I can see quite a few opportunities for the eMac to keep up with a single 3.2Ghz processor (a G4/G5 - or even Pentium M/Athlon - is about the same performance as a Pentium 4 at twice the clock speed). If it's nearly as fast as a dual 3.2Ghz, then I would suspect that the dual processors aren't really being utilised.

Well, we are just assuming that they're not making it open to vendors. iSync updates themselves usually occur with every minor OS update. Anyway, I'm not sure about how often the phone specific updates occur. I've had the same phone for all the time I've had my PowerBook.

I think it is possible - by building a conduit - but that's a bit heavyweight in many circumstances, and there is the question of compatability between versions. It's certainly heavyweight compared to Apple adding a support for additional devices that use exactly the same sync mechanism as a device they already support (ie. ranges of Nokia or Sony devices) - and they certainly don't provide those updates as often as they should.

Whether Apple are stopping third parties, or third parties just aren't interested, doesn't really matter - you still have to deal with the end result of limited choice. One thing that is clear is that Apple could do a lot more to allowing end users / communities to add support for devices that re-use existing sync mechanisms, and/or make use of SyncML.

 

[zync]

Interesting point about the latches, but it seems to be the you felt that you had to make use of it because it was there, rather than making use of it only when you had to. And you are probably right about the thickness, but I don't believe it would need to be as thick as PC laptops.

Besides which, the MBP is too thin anyway - as it has meant compromising the performance of the DVD drive. If there was a greater benefit I might not mind, but I refuse to accept the loss of useful functionality for (mostly)aesthetic reasons.

Hehe, you mistook me. I was a laptop repair tech a few years ago, and most of the models I fixed had select bays

I wouldn't say that the MBP is too thin. But I don't like that it sacrificed DL burning functionality for .1". Yes, it might have been more difficult engineering wise, but I can't imagine that they had to move stuff around that much. I may be wrong, but doesn't Apple create their own motherboards in-house? If so, they could've kept everything in the same place, and still had space for the better DVD drive.

I can see quite a few opportunities for the eMac to keep up with a single 3.2Ghz processor (a G4/G5 - or even Pentium M/Athlon - is about the same performance as a Pentium 4 at twice the clock speed). If it's nearly as fast as a dual 3.2Ghz, then I would suspect that the dual processors aren't really being utilised.

That's very true. When they're rendering, the dual processors are much faster. However, in programs that don't really use dual processors, the dual processors are only marginally faster, and really not noticeable—until you render. Of course, that's how it should be.

I think it is possible - by building a conduit - but that's a bit heavyweight in many circumstances, and there is the question of compatability between versions. It's certainly heavyweight compared to Apple adding a support for additional devices that use exactly the same sync mechanism as a device they already support (ie. ranges of Nokia or Sony devices) - and they certainly don't provide those updates as often as they should.

Whether Apple are stopping third parties, or third parties just aren't interested, doesn't really matter - you still have to deal with the end result of limited choice. One thing that is clear is that Apple could do a lot more to allowing end users / communities to add support for devices that re-use existing sync mechanisms, and/or make use of SyncML.

I can't comment on this as I don't know much about syncing on XP. I do think there should be a standard way of connecting phones over bluetooth though, like SyncML. If both devices spoke SyncML, and all devices connected through the same means, then it would be easy for anyone to add phone functionality, even lowly developers. Hell, if phones used an XML variant, it'd be even easier to publish things from your phone to the web, which would be nice for some people. BTW, can't you still use "Browse Device" even if your phone isn't supported in iSync? It might be a pain in the ass but you might be able to export iCal or vCal files from iCal and upload them to your phone that way. You could similarly publish contacts that way as well.

Of course this won't work on all phones. Some phones don't have folders for contacts like that. But maybe it would help some people out for now?

 

[grahamtriggs]

Hehe, you mistook me. I was a laptop repair tech a few years ago, and most of the models I fixed had select bays

Presumably the owners felt that they had to play with the latches every hour just to make sure that they were still working?

I wouldn't say that the MBP is too thin. But I don't like that it sacrificed DL burning functionality for .1". Yes, it might have been more difficult engineering wise, but I can't imagine that they had to move stuff around that much.

My point exactly - if it has to lose functionality to shave off a tiny bit of thickness, then it is too thin. If it costs 20% more to shave off a tiny bit of thickness, then it is too thin. Sure, some people will disagree, but put a cheaper laptop on sale that is a bit thicker and has a DL DVD and see which one sells the most...

I can't comment on this as I don't know much about syncing on XP.

Basically, there is no centralised syncing, although every manufacturer (and their dogs) provide some solution. It may also rely on you having an appropriate app to sync to (ie. Outlook).

It's nowhere near as elegant as iSync. But at least it (usually) works, and doesn't restrict your choice of devices (important when you have to deal with restrictive phone networks).

But this is one of the areas I'm holding out some hope for Vista (and where it could significantly evaporate an OS X advantage) - which is touted to have a centralised sync manager, as well as iCal and Mail type applications.

I do think there should be a standard way of connecting phones over bluetooth though, like SyncML. If both devices spoke SyncML, and all devices connected through the same means, then it would be easy for anyone to add phone functionality, even lowly developers.

Even as things stand, there are generally only a few ways of syncing, which is recycled across many models of phone. Take a look at Sony's recent phones, and AFAIK, they all do it the same way - maybe some with additional information. It ought to be possible to recognise the phone and sync it as an unknown but supportable method - but iSync doesn't do this. So you are stuffed until Apple decide to update the application (or maybe if you hack the app bundle yourself).

 

[jbdavis]

shipping MacBook Pro when?

anybody know when in February they are shipping the MacBook Pro? I hate how they arent telling anybody anything and I could be waiting a few weeks or a whole month... Just wanted to see if anybody heard anything.

 

[mongoos150]

Oh, that just breaks my little heart. My phone's the Motorolla E815. It's got bluetooth, but thanks to Verizon, it's a pretty crippled bluetooth. I'm aware that people have figured out ways to do "seem edits" or some such thing to make the bluetooth actually useful on the phone, but I'm pretty inept and even more terrified, so unless someone wants to do it for me, it looks like i'm out of luck. Oh well. No remote for me, I guess. Technology leaves me behind once again. *sigh*

It's not hard mate - I seem edited my phone in about twenty minutes and am not enjoying full bluetooth. Full mp3 transfers, full picture transfers, full access to move files between my phone/card and vice versa.

 

[mongoos150]

I can't afford the 1.83MBP, but am ordering the 1.67 (with 100GB HDD) tomorow. All of the benchmarks being done are with a 1.83GHz MBP, with the faster processor and vram is my 1.67MBP going to feel lagging in comparison? I really want to be experiencing these claims I've heard from everyone who used the MBP of "superfast milky performance." Thoughts?

 

[steve_hill4]

I can't afford the 1.83MBP, but am ordering the 1.67 (with 100GB HDD) tomorow. All of the benchmarks being done are with a 1.83GHz MBP, with the faster processor and vram is my 1.67MBP going to feel lagging in comparison? I really want to be experiencing these claims I've heard from everyone who used the MBP of "superfast milky performance." Thoughts?

I can't imagine it will be too significant a difference between the two models, (I am too going for the lower spec model), but those running apps that matter will notice a slight difference. I can't see the lower graphics card, memory and processor making too much of a difference to say HD playback. I will upgrade my memory anywhere between 3-9 months after it arrives, depending on performance. The HDD that ships will make no difference as I will add an external, the processor is margainly slower and the graphics shouldn't make too much of a difference for most apps.

Alternatively, you cold let people like me test drive their models and get feedback before deciding.

 

[_bnkr612]

Powerbook = MacBook

PowerMac = MacMac ??!!

MacPro.

 

[50548]

I love this guy! A humor writer, right here on Macrumors.com... exciting stuff. The stuff you wrote about Vista, stability and security, that was HYSTERICAL! I almost rolled out of my chair, wow! I mean, some humorists use hyperbole but you... you sir are a comedic genius!

Ditto, it's really laughable...is that guy Aiden Shaw with another alias?

 

[jbouklas]

Edited.

 

[grahamtriggs]

Also, to touch on like a three page sub-thread between two enthusiastic gentlemen sparring over technical issues in OS X, Windows, and Life, I have a question for you both: have either of you ACTUALLY used Windows in any sort of informed manner? It really doesn't sound like it.

I've been programming professionally (C/C++/Java) using DOS and Windows machines for over 13 years. (Some minor cross-porting experience to mainframe and Mac machines.

I've owned PCs (running DOS/Windows and occassionally Linux) for 12 years. All of the desktop PCs for the last 10 years I've built and installed myself.

But I've also owned (and primarily use at home) MacOS X machines (PowerBook and PowerMac) for the last 3 years.

 

[buryyourbrideau]

I ordered a MacBook today over the phone and the rep said there is no confirmed date in February. Just February. Could be the 1st, could be the 20th. Who knows