I was surprised that there was no mention of Adobe's progress towards "universalization" of their software.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Releases the MacBook Pro
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
bdkennedy1 said:
Dead...thank god.
PS- I want to think MacRumor's discussion board server for giving its life so that we might bask in the warm glowing warming glow of MWSF.
Alex Cutter said:Um. Wrong.
Sorry to say it but you are wrong, not him. The new display is "as bright as the Cinema's" and it only loses 60px of lenthwise resolution. It's a brand new display (15.4) therefore this display should crush anything we have seen on powerbooks before.
autrefois said:
Kevin Rose didn't "predict" crap. He had some buddy at Apple tell him about things. Big clues are the fact he got everything right (iPod remote w/ FM tuner? How could he predict a product NOBODY was talking about at all? Too precise a prediction to not be spoon fed.)
The other clue is that he didn't give this information out sooner. I mean he waits till it's so close to the keynote it doesn't matter anymore... becuase his source didn't tell him until it didn't matter anymore.
If Kevin had made these predictions a month ago. He'd have Apple legal serving sopenas to find out who his source is. They waited till now because there's less chance of any trouble for the employee.
Preliminary price/value comparison, and battery life
I know this is early, but I was interested in how the new MacBook would stack up against a Windows notebook in terms of value for your money. The closest available notebook I could find is the recently announced Acer TravelMate 8200. Keep in mind that the pricing is preliminary.
So here we go:
Acer TravelMate 8200
Price: Starting at $1999
CPU: Intel Core Duo 2.0GHz processor (Intel Yonah processor)
Memory: 1 GB (expandable up to 2GB RAM) 533/677
Screen: 15.4" WXGA (1680x1050 pixel resolution)
HD: Seagate 120GB 5400rpm SATA Hard Drive
Video card: ATI Radeon X1600 256MB (256 dedicated while 256MB can be borrowed from main memory)
Optical drive: DVD-Super Multi Double Layer
Camera: Built-in 1.3 Mega pixel camera, with 225-degree swivel ability
Wireless: Intel Pro wireless 3945 a/b/g
Other: Built-in VOIP capability
Ports: 5-in-1 card reader, a connector to Acer ezDock, Acer's PCI-Express based port replicator, an ExpressCard slot, a PC Card slot, 4 USB 2.0 ports, DVI-D port, SmartCard slot, IEEE 1394 port; External Display (VGA) port, Fast Infrared port; S-video/TV-out port, Headphones/speaker/line-out port with S/PDIF support, Microphone/line-in jack, Ethernet (RJ-45) port; Modem (RJ-11) port
Weight: 6.6lbs
Bling: Carbon Fiber finish lid
So stacking this up against the $1999 MacBook, the Acer comes out ahead in terms of processor speed (2.0 vs. 1.67 GHz), RAM (1 GB vs. 512 MB), hard drive space (120 vs. 80 GB), video card memory (256 vs. 128 MB), wireless capability (802.11a availability). The Acer has 2 more USB 2.0 ports, a 5-in-1 card reader, a few more TV-out options, and a few more notebook card options. A modem is a $50 add on item for the MacBook. The Acer has a higher resolution screen, but it loses on weight (6.6 vs. 5.6 lbs.).
If we take the higher end MacBook, and try to even the specs, you can get equivalent RAM, video card RAM, and HD space, and be a little closer to equivalent processor speed through Apple for $2599. Or you could get the $1999 MacBook, go to your favorite computer parts store and pick up an extra 512MB RAM stick and a 120 GB notebook drive for about $350, in which case you are still a little short in the CPU and video RAM areas.
So which gives you more value for your money? I would still vote for the 15" MacBook. Why? Because the MacBook runs OS X instead of crappy Windows, and is lighter, which is important for those of us who actually travel with a notebook.
As far as battery life goes, Anandtech recently benchmarked an ASUS Core Duo notebook, and found that battery life was pretty good. I won't repeat all of their findings, but office/productivity tests gave a battery life of about 230 minutes, while DVD playing gave a battery life of 192 minutes. Now this notebook has a 12.1" screen, so there's a good chance that the 15" MacBook will probably not be as good in the battery life area. On the other hand, the Acer TravelMate 8200 claims a battery life of 3.5 hours, so I guess we'll just have to see what happens.
It will be interesting to see what happens on the desktop side. No Core Duo desktop other than the new iMac has been announced so far. The closest would be the few Pentium M based desktops, but they seem to carry a price premium compared to other Intel based desktops. And Pentium D desktops have not been out for that long.
Based on the (admittedly very few) current Core Duo notebook offerings out there so far, I think the best product that will come out of the migration to Intel will be the MacBook that replaces the current 12" PowerBook. The ASUS COre Duo mentioned above has a 12" screen, but the current crop of Sony notebooks include a model with a 13.3" widescreen display, which is the screen I would like to see.
I know this is early, but I was interested in how the new MacBook would stack up against a Windows notebook in terms of value for your money. The closest available notebook I could find is the recently announced Acer TravelMate 8200. Keep in mind that the pricing is preliminary.
So here we go:
Acer TravelMate 8200
Price: Starting at $1999
CPU: Intel Core Duo 2.0GHz processor (Intel Yonah processor)
Memory: 1 GB (expandable up to 2GB RAM) 533/677
Screen: 15.4" WXGA (1680x1050 pixel resolution)
HD: Seagate 120GB 5400rpm SATA Hard Drive
Video card: ATI Radeon X1600 256MB (256 dedicated while 256MB can be borrowed from main memory)
Optical drive: DVD-Super Multi Double Layer
Camera: Built-in 1.3 Mega pixel camera, with 225-degree swivel ability
Wireless: Intel Pro wireless 3945 a/b/g
Other: Built-in VOIP capability
Ports: 5-in-1 card reader, a connector to Acer ezDock, Acer's PCI-Express based port replicator, an ExpressCard slot, a PC Card slot, 4 USB 2.0 ports, DVI-D port, SmartCard slot, IEEE 1394 port; External Display (VGA) port, Fast Infrared port; S-video/TV-out port, Headphones/speaker/line-out port with S/PDIF support, Microphone/line-in jack, Ethernet (RJ-45) port; Modem (RJ-11) port
Weight: 6.6lbs
Bling: Carbon Fiber finish lid
So stacking this up against the $1999 MacBook, the Acer comes out ahead in terms of processor speed (2.0 vs. 1.67 GHz), RAM (1 GB vs. 512 MB), hard drive space (120 vs. 80 GB), video card memory (256 vs. 128 MB), wireless capability (802.11a availability). The Acer has 2 more USB 2.0 ports, a 5-in-1 card reader, a few more TV-out options, and a few more notebook card options. A modem is a $50 add on item for the MacBook. The Acer has a higher resolution screen, but it loses on weight (6.6 vs. 5.6 lbs.).
If we take the higher end MacBook, and try to even the specs, you can get equivalent RAM, video card RAM, and HD space, and be a little closer to equivalent processor speed through Apple for $2599. Or you could get the $1999 MacBook, go to your favorite computer parts store and pick up an extra 512MB RAM stick and a 120 GB notebook drive for about $350, in which case you are still a little short in the CPU and video RAM areas.
So which gives you more value for your money? I would still vote for the 15" MacBook. Why? Because the MacBook runs OS X instead of crappy Windows, and is lighter, which is important for those of us who actually travel with a notebook.
As far as battery life goes, Anandtech recently benchmarked an ASUS Core Duo notebook, and found that battery life was pretty good. I won't repeat all of their findings, but office/productivity tests gave a battery life of about 230 minutes, while DVD playing gave a battery life of 192 minutes. Now this notebook has a 12.1" screen, so there's a good chance that the 15" MacBook will probably not be as good in the battery life area. On the other hand, the Acer TravelMate 8200 claims a battery life of 3.5 hours, so I guess we'll just have to see what happens.
It will be interesting to see what happens on the desktop side. No Core Duo desktop other than the new iMac has been announced so far. The closest would be the few Pentium M based desktops, but they seem to carry a price premium compared to other Intel based desktops. And Pentium D desktops have not been out for that long.
Based on the (admittedly very few) current Core Duo notebook offerings out there so far, I think the best product that will come out of the migration to Intel will be the MacBook that replaces the current 12" PowerBook. The ASUS COre Duo mentioned above has a 12" screen, but the current crop of Sony notebooks include a model with a 13.3" widescreen display, which is the screen I would like to see.
kenstee said:
it's the same weight as the old 15".
kenstee said:
don't count on it. if the loss is because of Intel, remember a lot of PCs have FW400 now.
kenstee said:
so take a modem with you. there's just not much point in having them built in these days. Apple's modem is hardly bulky.
kenstee said:
I think conducting heat is the point
BlueRevolution said:
Here is an estimate based on the fact the power adapter power went up to 85 watts from 65. They would not increase the power adapter power unless they had to accommondate a bigger battery and charging it or the system under normal and worse case conditions demand this kind of power. Well the battery did not get much larger so it must be the system using it. With that said here is my estimate on what we can expect.
A 30% decrease in normal/worse case usage time. The current PB at best case is about 5.5 hours so figure this thing will be about 3.8 hours, or typically around 2.5 to 3 hours since I get about 4 to 4.5 with my PB.
I've been trying to find out competitor pricing for Core Duo systems... no luck yet.d.f said:
Anyone have links to similar machines from competitors?
I know of the Sony Vaio FE series which will be released later this month which looks comparable, but I don't have much details.
http://products.sony.co.uk/vaio_fe_series.asp
After my post on the UK pricepoint vs the US one, here's my thoughts: I'm underwhelmed.
We all knew that as soon as Apple released an Intel powered 'Book that it was going to be an order of magnitude faster than the G4s, which were so long in the tooth it was untrue. Intel have delivered, and Mac users finally have a true professional notebook to lust over.
The name is meh, it'll grow on me I'm sure.
But then again, what else has changed? Not really that much.
Front Row on a laptop absolutely is not a serious selling point - who in their right mind is going to use it seriously? Jobs' rationale for Front Row on the iMac was that you'd sit on the other side of the room and watch a DVD/listen to music. With a desktop, fine, understandable. But a notebook? A notebook is portable. And even if you are going to sit down and use Front Row on it on the other side of the room, a 15" widescreen isn't exactly perfect.
Built in iSight - yeah, very nice, but I'd rather remove the cost of the camera from the default sticker price and have it as an optional extra. Some of us don't use iChat because outside of the US AIM is very much a minority protocol, and finding a Mac user who uses iChat is even more difficult.
Design - the same. It's nice, it's sleek, and it's three years old.
I can't help but notice that the 12" and 17" Powerbooks haven't been replaced
New power adapter is a brilliant invention, it will perform its task admirably.
Here's a professional notebook that in Jobs' own words "doesn't currently run Photoshop well enough for someone who uses it for hours and hours a day". Great advertising Steve. Who uses Photoshop? Much of the MacBook Duo's key market - creative professionals. I remember Jobs saying back in 1997 at the infamous Boston keynote where he announced the big shake-up of Apple's board "When was the last time we spoke to Adobe and asked them what we could do to build better computers to run Photoshop better? Wouldn't that benefit us both?" Approaching nine years on, this still rings true. Getting a pledge from Adobe that they would have a Photoshop universal binary out by a certain date would pacify users, but until then, this non-Photoshop loving professional notebook rings a little hollow. Many people say that without MS Office, Apple would be in trouble, and the same rings very true with Photoshop IMHO.
The pricing. So much for the "Intel will bring lower prices" rumours then.
I love the new iMac, it's actually perfect, but the MacBook Duo let's just say I wouldn't buy one if I had the money.
We all knew that as soon as Apple released an Intel powered 'Book that it was going to be an order of magnitude faster than the G4s, which were so long in the tooth it was untrue. Intel have delivered, and Mac users finally have a true professional notebook to lust over.
The name is meh, it'll grow on me I'm sure.
But then again, what else has changed? Not really that much.
Front Row on a laptop absolutely is not a serious selling point - who in their right mind is going to use it seriously? Jobs' rationale for Front Row on the iMac was that you'd sit on the other side of the room and watch a DVD/listen to music. With a desktop, fine, understandable. But a notebook? A notebook is portable. And even if you are going to sit down and use Front Row on it on the other side of the room, a 15" widescreen isn't exactly perfect.
Built in iSight - yeah, very nice, but I'd rather remove the cost of the camera from the default sticker price and have it as an optional extra. Some of us don't use iChat because outside of the US AIM is very much a minority protocol, and finding a Mac user who uses iChat is even more difficult.
Design - the same. It's nice, it's sleek, and it's three years old.
I can't help but notice that the 12" and 17" Powerbooks haven't been replaced
New power adapter is a brilliant invention, it will perform its task admirably.
Here's a professional notebook that in Jobs' own words "doesn't currently run Photoshop well enough for someone who uses it for hours and hours a day". Great advertising Steve. Who uses Photoshop? Much of the MacBook Duo's key market - creative professionals. I remember Jobs saying back in 1997 at the infamous Boston keynote where he announced the big shake-up of Apple's board "When was the last time we spoke to Adobe and asked them what we could do to build better computers to run Photoshop better? Wouldn't that benefit us both?" Approaching nine years on, this still rings true. Getting a pledge from Adobe that they would have a Photoshop universal binary out by a certain date would pacify users, but until then, this non-Photoshop loving professional notebook rings a little hollow. Many people say that without MS Office, Apple would be in trouble, and the same rings very true with Photoshop IMHO.
The pricing. So much for the "Intel will bring lower prices" rumours then.
I love the new iMac, it's actually perfect, but the MacBook Duo let's just say I wouldn't buy one if I had the money.
Hmmm...
Let's compare 2 $2,499 laptops shall we:
Apple MacBook:
CPU: Intel Core Duo 1.83Ghz
RAM: 1GB
HDD: 100GB 5400-rpm Serial ATA
DVD: Single-Layer RW
Graphics: ATI's X1600 256MB Radeon
Screen: 15.4" (1440x900)
WiFi: b/g
Weight: 5.6lbs
Battery life: ???
Casing: aluminium
Acer TravelMate 8200
CPU: Intel Core Duo 2Ghz
RAM: 2GB
HDD: Seagate 120GB 5400rpm SATA
DVD: Dual-Layer RW
Graphics: ATI's X1600 512MB Radeon
Screen: 15.4" (1366x768?)
WiFi: a/b/g
Weight: 6.6lbs
Battery Life: 6 hours (87W 7800mAH)
Casing: Carbon Fibre
To bump the memory and HDD to match that of the Acer adds $400 - and you still have got as much processing power, graphics memory, dual layer or battery life.
That's quite a premium to run Apple OS / software. No doubt about the quality of Apple, but they can't hide behind platform differences anymore - and they aren't really offering enough flexibility, and bang for the buck.
Let's compare 2 $2,499 laptops shall we:
Apple MacBook:
CPU: Intel Core Duo 1.83Ghz
RAM: 1GB
HDD: 100GB 5400-rpm Serial ATA
DVD: Single-Layer RW
Graphics: ATI's X1600 256MB Radeon
Screen: 15.4" (1440x900)
WiFi: b/g
Weight: 5.6lbs
Battery life: ???
Casing: aluminium
Acer TravelMate 8200
CPU: Intel Core Duo 2Ghz
RAM: 2GB
HDD: Seagate 120GB 5400rpm SATA
DVD: Dual-Layer RW
Graphics: ATI's X1600 512MB Radeon
Screen: 15.4" (1366x768?)
WiFi: a/b/g
Weight: 6.6lbs
Battery Life: 6 hours (87W 7800mAH)
Casing: Carbon Fibre
To bump the memory and HDD to match that of the Acer adds $400 - and you still have got as much processing power, graphics memory, dual layer or battery life.
That's quite a premium to run Apple OS / software. No doubt about the quality of Apple, but they can't hide behind platform differences anymore - and they aren't really offering enough flexibility, and bang for the buck.
Hey Einstein, read the original post.MrSugar said:
He claimed that there were the same amount of pixels.
dreamcast said:
I won't argue with the other points, because they are pretty valid.
Still, I have one question: What are you backing up to where Firewire 800 is more than 3 times faster than Firewire 400?
As for the screen, it is a little lower resolution, but duller? The horn being tooted about the screen is that it is brighter...
I'll wait for rev b or even c
No fw 800, no thanks. I keep my home folder on an external fw 800 drive and no fw 800 wrecks the way I work. No mention of target disk mode is also very worrying. As for no dual layer drive, no doubt they were waiting for blu-ray and it didn't arrive in time. The whole thing looks like an engineering proof of concept lash up which ended up going into production. The one thing that is really great is the power supply- we've had two powerbooks wrecked by people with big feet tripping over the cable. Just as well because this one looks as if it will need to be tied to the wall full time. My G4 isn't heading for ebay any time soon.
No fw 800, no thanks. I keep my home folder on an external fw 800 drive and no fw 800 wrecks the way I work. No mention of target disk mode is also very worrying. As for no dual layer drive, no doubt they were waiting for blu-ray and it didn't arrive in time. The whole thing looks like an engineering proof of concept lash up which ended up going into production. The one thing that is really great is the power supply- we've had two powerbooks wrecked by people with big feet tripping over the cable. Just as well because this one looks as if it will need to be tied to the wall full time. My G4 isn't heading for ebay any time soon.
dejo said:
So in other words, they got a 15" verison of the 17" screen they started using in the 17" Powerbook after last update.
Didn't the phrase "67% brighter" ring any bells when you heard it during the keynote?
ugh ugh ugh. What a dilemma. I am so ready to buy a Powerbook, er MacBook But it looks like this new laptop is just a placeholder. Looks like the next rev will be the breakout intel macs. Not that this laptop is bad. I guess I just expected a little more. Seems that the 1.83 should be about 2200, not 2500. And really, what is the speed of graphics card?? Does anyone know how it stacks up?
Nice things... optical out AND in. Required if you want hdtv/dvr functionality. Overall speed rocks. Built in isight. Dual dvi.
I have to say that the new iMac seems more compelling. Sounds like its faster than a g5 tower. In fact, I might have to get one of those as my placeholder until the next rev of macbooks. 1300 for an interim computer isn't all that bad a proposition. I just need to know how these ati gpu's perform... and its stupid that there isn't an optical in for the iMac.
Decisions decisions...
But it looks like this new laptop is just a placeholder. Looks like the next rev will be the breakout intel macs. Not that this laptop is bad. I guess I just expected a little more. Seems that the 1.83 should be about 2200, not 2500. And really, what is the speed of graphics card?? Does anyone know how it stacks up?Nice things... optical out AND in. Required if you want hdtv/dvr functionality. Overall speed rocks. Built in isight. Dual dvi.
I have to say that the new iMac seems more compelling. Sounds like its faster than a g5 tower. In fact, I might have to get one of those as my placeholder until the next rev of macbooks. 1300 for an interim computer isn't all that bad a proposition. I just need to know how these ati gpu's perform... and its stupid that there isn't an optical in for the iMac.
Decisions decisions...
Alright. Not too happy with this all, after looking it over.
At first (at school) when checking the live feed and some quick specs, I was excited, then I saw it's $2,000. I was planning on ordering an Intel based Mac laptop today, but I just can't afford $2,000 (nor justify) on THIS machine.
Yes, it's definitely has some cool features, but not enough for me to leap for yet, especially considering a PowerBook G4 15" is $400 less, and has DL support, FW800, and proven PPC Technology. I wanted a cool Intel 'Book, but not for this price, I just can't justify it.
That said, I'm not angry. I can wait a few more months for the consumer iBook line with Intel chips.
On the other hand, if I wasn't looking at getting a laptop soon, the Intel iMac looks awesome for the price. The iMac G5 was nice, and the Intel chips make an awesome desktop even sweeter. I'm almost tempted to pick one up to replace my near three year old G4 (which works perfectly fine), as with the edu discount and and 1GB RAM, it's about $1,400 - very reasonable.
At first (at school) when checking the live feed and some quick specs, I was excited, then I saw it's $2,000. I was planning on ordering an Intel based Mac laptop today, but I just can't afford $2,000 (nor justify) on THIS machine.
Yes, it's definitely has some cool features, but not enough for me to leap for yet, especially considering a PowerBook G4 15" is $400 less, and has DL support, FW800, and proven PPC Technology. I wanted a cool Intel 'Book, but not for this price, I just can't justify it.
That said, I'm not angry. I can wait a few more months for the consumer iBook line with Intel chips.
On the other hand, if I wasn't looking at getting a laptop soon, the Intel iMac looks awesome for the price. The iMac G5 was nice, and the Intel chips make an awesome desktop even sweeter. I'm almost tempted to pick one up to replace my near three year old G4 (which works perfectly fine), as with the edu discount and and 1GB RAM, it's about $1,400 - very reasonable.
I'm in mixed thoughts.
The iMac looks like a steal. "2x" the performance for the same price.
No-one else will have an integrated Yonah (or otherwise) system available. So Apple win here by default.
However it must REALLY suck if you bought one of the recently updated iMacs... 3 more months!
The MacBook ...
I dunno. Performance wise it is obviously good, but the loss of Firewire800 must surely be an issue for many people.
However it has ExpressCard/34 (whatever the /34 means, I think it means 'double-wide' - 2 single-wide cards or 1 double-wide can be accomodated) which will allow those that need FW800 to buy an adaptor for something which, upon reflection, isn't needed by a majority of the market. Still, I expect the 17" to have it.
And where are the other screen sizes?
The iMac looks like a steal. "2x" the performance for the same price.
No-one else will have an integrated Yonah (or otherwise) system available. So Apple win here by default.
However it must REALLY suck if you bought one of the recently updated iMacs... 3 more months!
The MacBook ...
I dunno. Performance wise it is obviously good, but the loss of Firewire800 must surely be an issue for many people.
However it has ExpressCard/34 (whatever the /34 means, I think it means 'double-wide' - 2 single-wide cards or 1 double-wide can be accomodated) which will allow those that need FW800 to buy an adaptor for something which, upon reflection, isn't needed by a majority of the market. Still, I expect the 17" to have it.
And where are the other screen sizes?
- Status