Asus's 13.3'' Core Duo Laptop

[dr_lha]

What most of you guys are missing on the dedicated graphics front is that this is not "just" an ibook upgrade. Personally, I would guess that the target market for the ibook will be just fine (perhaps not even notice) with integrated graphics. Now for the problem that I have. This is also a replacement for the 12" PB, which is the option for people who want performance in a small package. I realize that they want to upsell to a MBP, but I DON'T WANT A 15" LAPTOP. I've had one and they're too big for my taste. I don't mind if I take a small performance hit, but dropping a dedicated graphics card all together is a GIANT hit.

Personally, I think that integrated/dedicated graphics is the perfect way to differentiate the 12" PB replacement from the 12" iBook replacement.

Agreed, I'd defintely want a replacement for my 12" PB in the near future, and I'd prefer it to be a "pro" laptop. I think we'll have to wait and see how the MacBook weighs in though. If its more compact, does closed lid monitor spanning and has two upgradable RAM slots I think it will be a good replacement for the 12" PB. GMA 950 or no.

It should be noted however that the GMA 950 GFX chip outperforms the NVidia GeForce 5200 Go in the current 12" PB.

 

[Barham]

Noted, but that card was garbage from the get go.









though I knew that and bought mine anyway.....

 

[pavetheforest]

So what will this 945GM not be able to do? I mean, I realize there's principle involved, but what games will I not be able to play on it?

umm...ANY good game!?!?!
halflife 2...farcry....warcraft... whatever
yeah yeah, i know what people will reply, buy the macbook pro then
i'm not rich people! stick in an x1300, come on now

 

[jholzner]

What the hell...? First Intel in Macs, then Windows on Macs, now Asus makes Macs... Is Apple the new Nike, with making nothing of their own, besides branding? (No, I didn't forget about OS X)

Apple hasn't manufactured there own computers for years. They probably could have but it would be more expensive and then everyone would b**** about the even higher price. Also, IBM and Moto made the PPC so I don't really see your point. Apple isn't shipping Macs with Windows

 

[Chrispy]

Lets make this the last "Integrated Graphics" comment shall we?

I don't think we will ever have a last "integrated graphics" comment It is very upsetting because Apple has been so good about using dedicated graphics cards in their systems in the past. Sigh...

 

[alec]

We need to remember

... That though we may play games, Apple's target is not gamers. I do not know anyone (though maybe my pool is small) that bought an Apple because they were a gamer. They bought it because they were designers, liked the Mac OS, hated Windows, etc., not because they expected to be able to play 3d games on lower-end Macintosh computers.

That being said, integrated graphics? What happened to Separate but Equal? Brown vs Board of Education baby!

 

[babble]

Maybe... But, Apple want's to gain new markets. So they need to give the most out of all their offerings.

I'm a designer and that's why I've been on a Mac for a long time. But, I see designers turning away from Apple, for games, for cheaper hardware, etc.

I'm sure Apple, like in all good business pratices, doesn't want the cheapsakes market. But they still want the gamers.

All this to say, I'm a designer and I also love to play games on my Mac (WoW, Heroes, etc.). So please Apple, give us more than the minimum.

PS To the guy responding about what games we won't be able to play on it. Keep it real. I'm already more than able to play WoW on my eMac at home (and it only has a 32MB card).

 

[pavetheforest]

... That though we may play games, Apple's target is not gamers. I do not know anyone (though maybe my pool is small) that bought an Apple because they were a gamer. They bought it because they were designers, liked the Mac OS, hated Windows, etc., not because they expected to be able to play 3d games on lower-end Macintosh computers.

That being said, integrated graphics? What happened to Separate but Equal? Brown vs Board of Education baby!

the main audience is...what, STUDENTS?!!!! now that macs run windoze, students can play.... GAMES and then run adobe cs2 creative suite after the fun for design homework...i definitly wont get the new macbook if it has integrated craphics.....students play games, i want to be able to play good games on an OS that wont crap out, with a card that wont suck, for a decent price because mommy and daddy dont pay for my things....

 

[pavetheforest]

PS To the guy responding about what games we won't be able to play on it. Keep it real. I'm already more than able to play WoW on my eMac at home (and it only has a 32MB card).

maybe you can run it on your 32mb card, but not on the settings the games were designed for, if i want to play a pixels game, i'll play darwinia for ten minutes

 

[boncellis]

Poor dr_lha, you must be tearing your hair out, people just don't seem to see your point. I just want you to know that I do, and you've convinced me that IIG are not as bad as everyone has labeled them.

It's a minority, albeit a vocal one (of course they'll show up on this board), that really want their Apple notebook to play the latest and greatest graphics intensive games. I would think they would be foaming over Sony pushing back the PS3 release or Nintendo taking its time with the Revolution rather than Apple not giving them the x1600 in a notebook for $1099.

Perspective. It goes a long way.

 

[dr_lha]

Poor dr_lha, you must be tearing your hair out, people just don't seem to see your point. I just want you to know that I do, and you've convinced me that IIG are not as bad as everyone has labeled them.

It's a minority, albeit a vocal one (of course they'll show up on this board), that really want their Apple notebook to play the latest and greatest graphics intensive games. I would think they would be foaming over Sony pushing back the PS3 release or Nintendo taking its time with the Revolution rather than Apple not giving them the x1600 in a notebook for $1099.

Perspective. It goes a long way.

Thanks for the support. I guess my problem is that I don't give a crap about games. At least not computer games, I do all my gaming on my PS2 and Gamecube, and that won't be changing any time soon.

However I think I am in the majority rather than the minority here. Most students I know (my wife is a student and I work at a University so I know quite a few) use laptops every day but don't ever play games on them past a little tetris/solataire/suduko style stuff.

PC gaming is a niche market, a small niche at that. If people don't believe this compare the number of computers in the world to the number of PS2s. Now compare how well PC games sell compared to PS2 games. PS2 games far outsell any PC games.

All I know is that the GMA 950 has the best GFX performance out of any of my Macs when doing the stuff that matters to me: Playing Movies, UI interaction and using Google Earth (which runs smoother than on my wife's iBook despite running under Rosetta).

 

[antonink2006]

It's a minority, albeit a vocal one (of course they'll show up on this board), that really want their Apple notebook to play the latest and greatest graphics intensive games. I would think they would be foaming over Sony pushing back the PS3 release or Nintendo taking its time with the Revolution rather than Apple not giving them the x1600 in a notebook for $1099.
Perspective. It goes a long way.

You are so right! And we are so daft...
But please do point me to the quote advocating the use of the X1600 or higher in an ibook. The only references I can find mention the x1300.

This is not about playing the latest and greatest graphics intensive games, but for a (tiny) degree of future-proofing.

 

[netdog]

Yup. Decompressing video in general goes on the CPU. The graphics card merely does some scaling and hardware filtering to make a scaled video look less pixely. I doubt the entry level Macbook will handle 1080 despite the screen qould be too small for that anyway. But 720, no problemo. There were rumors about the screen having native 720 resolution anyway thus eliminating scaling (graphics card load) completely.

You doubt this based on what?

Does the Mini Core Solo do 1080i? That would give us the answer -- if there is even going to be a Core Solo MacBook. Anyway, if somebody with a Core Solo Mini could post as to whether their computer can do 1080, that should allow us to make informed judgements about the capabilities of a MacBook solo with integrated 950 graphics.

Now there is a name we might see. The MacBook Solo and the MacBook Duo. I don't like it, but I could see it.

 

[milo]

This is not about playing the latest and greatest graphics intensive games, but for a (tiny) degree of future-proofing.

And the only problem with that argument is that we have no idea if a low end mobile card would be any more future-proof than integrated graphics.

Does the Mini Core Solo do 1080i? That would give us the answer -- if there is even going to be a Core Solo MacBook.

Nope. That's why I keep saying that a good processor is more important than a graphics card. I'm hoping the base model has a duo, unless they're able to drop the price to $799.

 

[netdog]

Nope. That's why I keep saying that a good processor is more important than a graphics card. I'm hoping the base model has a duo, unless they're able to drop the price to $799.

Having run my iMac since about a week after their introduction, I have to say that I am totally sold on the Core Duo. My previous machine was a 3.4 P4, and I had never used a dual-core cpu before, but I am really blown away. Amazing cpu, amazing machine.

 

[ManchesterTrix]

To talk of something besides graphics, am I the only person in the world that would kill for a 11.1 inch/2.5 lbs Apple laptop?

 

[Bsresponsive1]

To talk of something besides graphics, am I the only person in the world that would kill for a 11.1 inch/2.5 lbs Apple laptop?

I have the 10.6 inch widescreen vaio and It is an excellent size.

I would agree that an ultra portable mac would be great.

 

[boncellis]

To talk of something besides graphics, am I the only person in the world that would kill for a 11.1 inch/2.5 lbs Apple laptop?

You might be.

Jk, I think something smaller than 12", or now 13.3", is something Apple might make a run at, but I'm not sure it would be a traditional notebook--maybe something like a tablet. I think the portability/features quotient reaches a point of diminishing returns below a certain point. If it's a new form factor (no keyboard, separate docking station, etc.) then it would have a better chance to catch on, I think.

 

[ManchesterTrix]

You might be.

Jk, I think something smaller than 12", or now 13.3", is something Apple might make a run at, but I'm not sure it would be a traditional notebook--maybe something like a tablet. I think the portability/features quotient reaches a point of diminishing returns below a certain point. If it's a new form factor (no keyboard, separate docking station, etc.) then it would have a better chance to catch on, I think.

The Sony Vaio TX series seems to be doing pretty well. Which is pretty much what I want from a laptop(Well except for the needing to run OS X). Granted, it IS a niche, but I'll keep dreaming.

 

[boncellis]

I like Sony's stuff too. Who knows what kind of a stranglehold they would have on things if they didn't continuously shoot themselves in the foot with all the proprietary technology they come out with.

I had a 12" PB, and it was a sleek machine. I can just imagine how it would be to carry around a tiny thing like the Sony that was referred to, or the Fujitsu sub-notebook. It is a niche, which means Apple probably won't touch it--I think the rumored 13.3" form factor is evidence of that. That's not to say that they shouldn't, though!

 

[dr_lha]

You doubt this based on what?

Does the Mini Core Solo do 1080i? That would give us the answer -- if there is even going to be a Core Solo MacBook. Anyway, if somebody with a Core Solo Mini could post as to whether their computer can do 1080, that should allow us to make informed judgements about the capabilities of a MacBook solo with integrated 950 graphics.

Generally speaking, the mini Core Duo and do 1080p and the Core Solo can do 720p (and stutters of 1080p), so yes, it is totally dependant on the CPU and not the GFX card.

 

[daschim]

size 13"

What are the measurements of a 13"widescreen display?? Can it be 5.52 inch high and 11.59 wide? If this is true .... than this is very small. I hope there will be some 15" consumer laptops.

 

[dr_lha]

To talk of something besides graphics, am I the only person in the world that would kill for a 11.1 inch/2.5 lbs Apple laptop?

Nope. Prior to owning my 12" PB (my first Mac) I owned a IBM Thinkpad X20 and a Sony Vaio 505TR.

Both of these were sub 3lb computers with no CD rom/floppy built in and I was really happy with them. I'd love to see Apple produce a lighter laptop without a optical drive (how often do I really use my DVD drive in my laptop?), but I really think 12" is about as a small a screen as I want. The 10.4" VAIO screen was a little too small for my liking, even though I used it for 2+ years.

 

[mikea]

ya

There is no "MacBook" any more than there is, or ever will be, a desktop model called simply the "Mac." There is currently a MacBook Pro, just as the PowerMac will eventually become the "Mac Pro" if Apple decides to follow through with that naming scheme as it most likely will. As with the iMac, the iBook will continue to be the moniker Apple's entry/mid-level consumer laptop.

Other, new portable Macs have long been rumored to join the 'Book family, probably under the name MacBook Thin for an ultraportable mid-range model. It is possible that the Thin could ship alongside the new iBooks, but the iBooks name is not going away and those who simply call it the "MacBook" are getting confused by the ever-present "Game of Telephone effect". They may want to check their sources before they continue confusing the community by using that name.

 

[dr_lha]

There is no "MacBook" any more than there is, or ever will be, a desktop model called simply the "Mac." There is currently a MacBook Pro, just as the PowerMac will eventually become the "Mac Pro" if Apple decides to follow through with that naming scheme as it most likely will. As with the iMac, the iBook will continue to be the moniker Apple's entry/mid-level consumer laptop.

Other, new portable Macs have long been rumored to join the 'Book family, probably under the name MacBook Thin for an ultraportable mid-range model. It is possible that the Thin could ship alongside the new iBooks, but the iBooks name is not going away and those who simply call it the "MacBook" are getting confused by the ever-present "Game of Telephone effect". They may want to check their sources before they continue confusing the community by using that name.

We'll see won't we?