It's unanimous. Bloggers hate 'MacBook Pro' name

MacBytes

macrumors bot
Original poster
Jul 5, 2003
15,835
0



Category: 3rd Party Hardware
Link: It's unanimous. Bloggers hate 'MacBook Pro' name
Description:: For all the excitement surrounding Apple Computer's first Intel-based computers, which CEO Steve Jobs announced Tuesday at Macworld 2006, there's been a surprising amount of attention focused on analyzing the name of the newest line of laptops, the MacBook Pro.

Posted on MacBytes.com
Approved by arn
 

Mitthrawnuruodo

Moderator emeritus
Mar 10, 2004
13,595
142
Bergen, Norway
Well, the examples in that "article" may not have been written by the sharpest knives in the drawer... :rolleyes:

The one from Breaking Windows even has the misconseption that "Power" in PowerBook has something to do with the "Power" in Power PC... :rolleyes:

I think MacBook Pro (and later an introduction of a plain MacBook or a MackBook Mini or whatever) is a very good move by Apple... :)

Now don't make me start a blog just to state that... :p
 

PlaceofDis

macrumors Core
Jan 6, 2004
19,232
4
its just a name that we aren't used to yet. give it time and it will come as naturally as PowerBook.

while i'm not fond of the new name, i totally understand the direction Apple is going with it.
 

nagromme

macrumors G5
May 2, 2002
12,551
1,186
I like the name PowerBook better.

I'm used to it.

But MacBook is equally good and I'll get used to that too.

MacBook has a very important advantage: it has "Mac" in it. There truly are a lot of people who don't know what a PowerBook is, or that it is compatible with Macs. They know what a Mac is though--in general terms.

Unifiying all Macs together at last is a good move.

As for the "Pro"--seems silly and unnecessary. Except, of course, that it's necessary! It means more MacBooks will be coming.

Think how silly "iPod Mini" would have sounded for the FIRST iPod. But it makes sense because there are more than one iPod.

I can easily see there being several different MacBook names, not just "Pro" and "regular." Just like we have iPod Shuffle and Nano.

Maybe:

* MacBook Express - thin, light ultraportable

* MacBook or MacBook Something - 13" primary iBook replacement

* MacBook Pro in 13" and 15" sizes

* MacBook Pro HD in 17" or 20" size
 

Mord

macrumors G4
Aug 24, 2003
10,091
21
UK
what did people think when apple changed their desktop name from mac II to power macintosh? it probable annoyed them, although i was in the "wtf, thats a stupid name|" crowd, and to a degree still am it's growing on me/
 

Mord

macrumors G4
Aug 24, 2003
10,091
21
UK
so you'd rather see apple get owned by intels conroe based cpu's in the next couple of years untill apple is forced to make a switch much less gracefully than they are now.

architecture does not matter now, intels dident beat RISC they joined it, newer intel chips are essentially RISC designs with hardware emulation and now intel is not clock speed mad they can really start to own everyone elce useing their size and R&D budget to make some kick ass chips, not just add clock speed to the ****** P4.
 

Lacero

macrumors 604
Jan 20, 2005
6,639
2
iPod nano sounded pretty dumb, but it's okay now.

MacBook Pro sounds pretty dumb too, but it's perhaps more natural than PowerBook.
Here's to the Crazy Ones
 

iGary

Guest
May 26, 2004
19,583
0
Randy's House
Hector said:
so you'd rather see apple get owned by intels conroe based cpu's in the next couple of years untill apple is forced to make a switch much less gracefully than they are now.

architecture does not matter now, intels dident beat RISC they joined it, newer intel chips are essentially RISC designs with hardware emulation and now intel is not clock speed mad they can really start to own everyone elce useing their size and R&D budget to make some kick ass chips, not just add clock speed to the ****** P4.
Freescale has a dual core G4 chip, and you don't see anyone bitching about the Quad.
 

PlaceofDis

macrumors Core
Jan 6, 2004
19,232
4
grapes911 said:
I just hope they don't release a "MacBook Home". It will remind me too much of XP Home/Pro.
i doubt they would ever make that mistake, but if they do. :eek: shame on Apple.
 

ethernet76

macrumors 6502a
Jul 15, 2003
501
0
iGary said:
Freescale has a dual core G4 chip, and you don't see anyone bitching about the Quad.
I do however see everyone bitching about missed deadlines and slight performance increases.

2 ghz to 2.5 dual cores in three years? No G5 laptop? IBM wasn't ever suited to supply Apple with the kind of chips they would have liked at the pace they would have liked. Intel and AMD are really the only two suited for the job.

The G4 has been a crappy chip for a long time. To claim the dual core G4 might actually make a decent computer is laughable. Apple has been getting killed on the portables. There about as good as celerons.

I love my powerbook, but my sister's AMD notebook crushed it. It was kind of pathetic. Hopefully with these new chips, the level of disparity between Apple desktops and portables won't be that great anymore.
 

Mord

macrumors G4
Aug 24, 2003
10,091
21
UK
iGary said:
Freescale has a dual core G4 chip, and you don't see anyone bitching about the Quad.
freescale is still sampling them and wont ship in quantitiy for a long long time, also they were not suited for apple use, not enough pcie lanes, and the G4 core was virtually unchanged just a new bus and dual cores, the G5 i have no issue with as it stands, but in Q4 intel will launch covertown a quad core yonah based xeon 64-bit, SMP, 8MB L2 cache 2MB per core, one of those will outperform a current quad by a fair margin even if IBM got the dual core 970 to 3GHz it wouldent be able to compete.

if you've read my posts before i've aruged endlessly for the G5, sure it could have gone in the powerbook, but it'd just get owned by yonah, the G5 is competitive now sure and it's a good investment to buy one now but apple made the right call switching when it did because over the next yeah intel will be getting up to speed and apple wants to get on the train when it makes sense, not two years down the line when it's back at 1.5% market share.

if intel was going to own the G5 in 2005 apple would have switched earlier, they dident, everyone knows the P4 sucks ass now is the time to switch as intel transitions the desktop and server to a sensible architecture, if IBM had the R&D budget on the G5 that intel does on conroe it'd surely be just as fast if not faster, but they dont have the architecture advantage anymore seeing as at hearth everything is RISC these days or the intel MHz addiction advantage anymore.

now quit your whineing have fun with your mac just as you would and maybe santa will bring you a 8 core 3GHz intel mac for christmas 06.
 

KREX725

macrumors regular
Apr 20, 2003
154
0
I remember the same discussions when an odd looking Mac was debuted years ago, but most people came to love the iMac...and iBook...and iTunes...and iPod...etc, etc.

Give it time, people. Does anyone actually expect Apple to be like, "Whoa, let's strip the name before the next variations come out"? Just like any other change to Apple's line, it will go like that comic that was posted awhile back (after the announce of the Intel chips) where the Mac fans go through outrage, disappointment, acceptance, and finally excitement.

Personally, they can call it anything they want as long as it actually rocks with OSX like they claim.