Just got a refurbed Blackbook, C2D, 2.16ghz today, came with Tiger???

Discussion in 'MacBook' started by VoodooDaddy, Mar 7, 2008.

  1. VoodooDaddy macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 14, 2003
    #1
    For what earthly reason would Leopard not be pre-installed on this machine? I was surprised when I saw a Leopard "drop in disc", then shocked upon first boot up seeing that Tiger was installed.

    Well first off on initial boot I had a kernel panic several times. That was a bit unsettling. But a reset of the pram and things seemed to be ok.

    But back to the Tiger install, my ONLY thought was maybe this mabook was actually a brand new unit that they just repackaged as a reburb since they have been refreshed?? Is this a likely scenario?
     
  2. heatmiser macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    #2
    Count yourself lucky. The 2.16 is the last model capable of running Tiger. I'm still on it myself, with no plans to switch to Leopard.
     
  3. VoodooDaddy thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 14, 2003
    #3
    Last model capable of running tiger? How do you figure that? Her CD 1.83ghz ran Tiger also.

    She wants Leopard and is installing the drop in disc as we speak. I was just surprised that Leopard has been out about 4 1/2 months and this macbook still had tiger installed.
     
  4. heatmiser macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    #4
    The core duo was released before the core 2 duo. The pre-SR core 2 duo is the last model that will run Tiger. Everything since then will only run Leopard.

    They don't reinstall operating systems once the computers leave the factory. Once it's boxed, it's boxed.
     
  5. gkarris macrumors 604

    gkarris

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2004
    Location:
    "No escape from Reality..."
    #5
    Whaaa?

    The Apple Store's been selling the 2.2 GHz Black MacBooks and those have Leopard pre-installed. (I know, I just got one).

    Apple hasn't sold the 2.16 ones for a while.

    Where and when did you get it?
     
  6. VoodooDaddy thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 14, 2003
    #6
    It was a refurb from the Apple store. Im telling you, it came with Tiger, 10.4.10, we just installed Leopard from the drop in disc. Was a 2.16ghz C2D.
     

    Attached Files:

  7. VoodooDaddy thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 14, 2003
    #7
    We choose to erase and install with Leopard using the custom install so we could eliminate the printer drivers and extra languages. This obviously means the iLife apps are not installed. How do you go about installing those from the restore discs?
     
  8. pjashley1 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2007
    #8
    Just insert restore disc 1 from your desktop, and choose the option to install included software.
     
  9. VoodooDaddy thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 14, 2003
    #9
    Just tried that, not letting us. What a ^%@$! pain in the ass! I presume since Tiger was preloaded it wont install ilife with leopard in there.

    I put in the restore disc with Tiger on it. I click "bundled software only." I follow the prompts that then it says it checks to see if the bundled software can be installed. Then says "the bundled applications cannot be installed."
     
  10. conancn macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2005
    #10
    How much is it? my college store is selling these 2.16 black new for $900, worthy?
     
  11. VoodooDaddy thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 14, 2003
    #11
    We paid $999 for it. I'd say for $900 its a steal.

    Btw, the problem with the install of iLife off the restore discs was solved.
     
  12. gkarris macrumors 604

    gkarris

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2004
    Location:
    "No escape from Reality..."
    #12
    $999 not the deal for the 2.16 w/ GMA950, since the 2.2 w/ X3100 is going for $1049.

    $900 - now that's the deal...
     
  13. VoodooDaddy thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 14, 2003
    #13
    999 not a deal? I think so. Dont forget, this was a blackbook, you pay a premium just for the black color. Personally, yes, Id rather have more computer for less money. Actually the 2.2ghz with 3100x is going for $999 also, but its white. However, my wife wanted a blackbook and at $999 with the 160gb hdd it was, IMO, a deal.

    Plus, not everyone is put off by the GMA950 gpu. I see alot of moaning and groaning on this board over the gpu that Apple uses across the whole product line. What is it that everyone is doing with their macs that requires a better graphics card? Games??
     
  14. heatmiser macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    #14
    He was talking about the 2.2 x3100 blackbook, which is $1049 @ Apple.
     
  15. VoodooDaddy thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 14, 2003
    #15
    And where was that? I have never see it.
     
  16. heatmiser macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    #16
    They're in the refurb section, but they sell out by afternoon most days. Either way, you've got a good machine; I paid the same amount for an equivalent 2.16 (but white) back in December.
     
  17. VoodooDaddy thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 14, 2003
    #17
    The day I ordered this blackbook I was up at 6am and there were about 7 different macbooks to choose from. There was a blackbook that was 2.16ghz with an 80gb hdd for $899. That was the one I was going to buy but before I could get it in the cart and paid for it was gone.

    The next one was the one I ordered, $999 with the 160gb hdd. I did not see any other blackbooks for less than $1199 I think.

    Anyway, I personally thought $999 was a deal for a computer with the original price of $1499. Id never seen a blackbook under a grand, and here were 2 that were.

    Guess at this point, regardless of what was there, the wife is happy with what she got. Shoot, a year and a half ago we paid $1049 for a 1.83ghz, CD macbook with 512mb ram and a combo drive! So by comparison, I think 999 was a deal :)
     
  18. mosx macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2007
    #18
    The X3100 isn't even better than the GMA 950. In most cases, the X3100 is WORSE than the GMA 950. THe real world performance is only on par with the GMA 950 in most cases, worse in others, and the drivers are still absolutely terrible.

    I'd personally take the system you have. I'd rather have the 3GB RAM limit versus 4 but have the much more stable GPU.
     
  19. VoodooDaddy thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 14, 2003
    #19
    FYI...if anyone is interested in the problem I was having trying to install iLife back off the recovery discs.....

    Wife is out of town for a while so this new blackbook was delivered to where she is. Over the phone I talked her through installing Leopard from the drop in disc. I said go ahead and do a erase and install to eliminate removing the extra languages and print drivers later, just to save a few gbs of space.

    I knew this would leave her with an install of Leopard that didnt include the iLife suit, but knew that she could re-install that from the recovery discs. When I told her to get the recovery discs and try thats when the problems started as I noted before. It was saying "unable to install bundled applications."

    In the end the problem was, when I told her to get the recovery discs, she thought I meant the ones from her original macbook. So instead of using the recovery discs that came with the blackbook, she was trying the ones that had came with her white CD macbook. Once that was figured out the install of iLife was no problem. :p
     
  20. VoodooDaddy thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 14, 2003
    #20
    Agh! They have those 2.2ghz blackbooks in now for 1049. There is a whole mess of macbooks to choose from. Man, Im really tempted to order myself a macbook but I just ordered an iMac which should be here today! Is buying 3 macs in a weeks time too many?? :D

    I have it all queued in my cart, just waiting to hit submit order. But I cant.... :(
     
  21. RSNL macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2007
  22. Pacer69 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    #22
    >my wife wanted a blackbook and at $999 with the 160gb hdd it was, IMO, a deal.

    I'll say, for $999 that was a great deal!

    Those 2.2s for 1049 also sound like quite a bargain. I'm kind of torn b/w getting a 2.2 or a new 2.4. The 2.2 advantage appears to be that it can run Tiger...which is a big draw for me as I've read several reports on Leopard having wireless isssues across all models.
     
  23. Pacer69 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    #23
    And yeah, I'd ditto the count yourself lucky comment as well for the reasons in my last post, among other compatibility potentialities in 3rd-party apps like Camino, printer drivers, etc.
     
  24. gkarris macrumors 604

    gkarris

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2004
    Location:
    "No escape from Reality..."
    #24
    Uh, no it's not. The X3100 has a lot of latest features and support:

    http://softwarecommunity.intel.com/articles/eng/1488.htm

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_GMA

    The Mac drivers might not be quite there yet but it's tons better...
     
  25. mosx macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2007
    #25
    As an "old school" PC gamer (and console gamer) I learned MANY years ago that what is said on paper is always VERY different from real world performance.

    This is especially the case with Intel's paper specifications for all GPUs.

    Look at the GMA 950 for a second. Many of the paper specs put it above all of nVidia and ATI's current and past integrated GPUs. In some respects, on paper, it is on the same level as the GeForce 8400M GS in my HP.

    The GMA X3100, on paper, looks better than the GeForce 8400M GS in my HP.

    However, what is the real world performance like?

    Well, I had another HP with the ATI Xpress 200M chipset (integrated GPU, but dedicated memory, 128MB worth) and a Turion64 ML-37 (2GHz), along with 1GB of RAM and Windows XP MCE 2005. Unreal Tournament 2004 could achieve a solid 30fps in ALL situations at 1280x800 with medium settings across the board on that system. Half-Life 2, 30fps at the same settings as UT2k4.

    On my MacBook? Well, it has a 2.16GHz Core 2 Duo, GMA 950, and 1GB of RAM. In XP, using the latest drivers, UT2k4 can barely choke out 30fps at 800x600. Half-Life 2 at any resolution, unless certain hardware and software modes are forced and visual quality is greatly sacrificed (graphical atmosphere plays a HUGE role in this game), the game is a slide show at nearly any setting in most circumstances.

    The GMA X3100, in nearly all benchmarks, scores roughly the same as the GMA 950, give or take a couple of frames here and there.

    What about the GeForce 8400M GS in my HP? Despite the fact that the paper specs are roughly the same as the GMA 950 and X3100, the real world performance is another story. I get a rock solid 60fps in UT2k4 at 1280x800 with everything maxed, same goes for Half-Life 2 and most of Half-Life 2: Episode 2. Doom 3 runs smooth as butter at any setting. Call of Duty 4, a game that would make the X3100 cry, runs just as good as it does on the consoles. It even runs UT3 great, as long as I use reasonable settings. This is all on a Core 2 Duo at 2GHz (Santa Rosa) with 2GB of RAM on Vista. I just gave Vista another try with the latest WHQL certified nVidia drivers available through Windows Update and my gaming performance is now BETTER in Vista than it was in XP.

    Long story short, despite what Intel says about the X3100 on paper, real world tests (except for 2 or so) show the GMA 950 still being the better performer and having much more stable drivers across the board. Ironically, even though the GMA 950 does NOT support OpenGL 2.0, it still has better OpenGL support! Even user experiences I've read on other forums support this. I remember reading a thread at one notebook forum where people were trying to figure out how to disable the Hardware T&L on the X3100 to get games playable. Essentially, they were taking it "down" to the level of the GMA 950 so they could actually play games on it.

    The GMA X3100 is truly a joke. I would MUCH rather have the proven performer with the stable drivers and be "stuck" at "only" 3GB of RAM than go with something that has a terrible track record after a year of availability and the ability to handle one more gigabyte of memory.
     

Share This Page