Odd that Boot Camp hasn't been prepared for the MB's release. Probably just a matter of time.
http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/publicbeta.html
http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/publicbeta.html
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.
MacBook Features and Photos
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
myke323 said:
You can get a 24" Dell LCD for $650 with coupons now a days! You can get the 20" Dell LCD for under $400.
The battery says 55 Wh, which I assume would be 5500mAh. I remember my system profiler reported my battery as just under 5200 mAh.FearFactor47 said:
You seriously are complaining about a few ounces?CrackedButter said:
Especially when you look at this comparison:
Core Trio said:
Yes, this was what I was thinking too... I have a feeling that Steve wanted to make the black glossy, but feared the backlash that happened with the nano, as glossy black would show scratches incredibly easily.
In any case, I still think they should have bitten the bullet and made them glossy, as they would be much more attractive and "Apple-like" - and would sell better. Again, to me the black MacBook looks like about the most boring, ugly, and PC-like laptop Apple has released in 8+ years.
alexf said:
Then again that could have created a new product much like the ipod did. MacBook socks! That would surely deter a class action suit
ImAlwaysRight said:The battery says 55 Wh, which I assume would be 5500mAh. I remember my system profiler reported my battery as just under 5200 mAh.
You seriously are complaining about a few ounces?
While I like Apple's trend towards slimmer laptops, I agree with the poster who complained about the weight gain. My Powerbook G4 (12") is ~4.7lbs versus a claimed 5.2lbs for the new Macbook. It doesn't seem like much, but it's a step in the wrong direction.
With more efficient displays and CPUs, you'd expect weight loss to be one of the benefits.
CrackedButter said:
I agree, although I would not go quite so far as to say that they downright "suck."
However, those of us that were expecting something revolutionary in terms of size and weight have been sorely disappointed. Why, for instance, must they have a thick border around the screen - which adds more width and height - instead of a thin one like the MacBook Pros?
Yes, yes, I know some may answer that it is because this is a "consumer" notebook and it would have been more expensive to fit everything into a smaller enclosure, but nonetheless, this is what many were expecting, especially as laptops are supposed to get smaller with each release, and not stay the same size (it has been 5 years since the release of the previous 12" iBook design, and these are about the same size and weight proportional to the screen size).
The rumors were all about a "radical form factor redesign," but the appearance, size, and weight of these new iBooks - er, MacBooks, that is - is nothing radical nor revolutionary.
In short: they could have been worse, but nonetheless this highly anticipated release leaves me disappointed.
My observations (from the photos):
1. The battery is HUGE! It looks to be almost twice the size of the old iBook battery, and yet only 2.5 hours of DVD playback (my iBook used to get about 2 hours). The Core Duo and the brighter, bigger monitor is sucking down a lot of juice.
2. I'm amazed at how compact the motherboard is. If you take out the optical drive, use a smaller battery, and a 1.8" HDD, you'd get a super compact ultraportable.
3. I'm a little disappointed by the overall dimensions of the MacBooks. Thinner is nice, but it looks to be quite a bit winder than the old. I'm starting to agree about the need for an ultraportable.
1. The battery is HUGE! It looks to be almost twice the size of the old iBook battery, and yet only 2.5 hours of DVD playback (my iBook used to get about 2 hours). The Core Duo and the brighter, bigger monitor is sucking down a lot of juice.
2. I'm amazed at how compact the motherboard is. If you take out the optical drive, use a smaller battery, and a 1.8" HDD, you'd get a super compact ultraportable.
3. I'm a little disappointed by the overall dimensions of the MacBooks. Thinner is nice, but it looks to be quite a bit winder than the old. I'm starting to agree about the need for an ultraportable.
alexf said:
That's what I was thinking, too -- I'd love to have seen a shiny black MacBook -- I'm disappointed!
Hey, maybe they'll come out with a subnotebook, say a two-pound 10-incher in shiny black or shiny white to match the iPods! I'd snap one of those up in a heartbeat.
ya i knew they weren't 1,000 but just used that figure coz that was the saving bewtween the 2 models... so i should ad that you would have quite a bit leftover to buy more toys...bommai said:
also, are the dell LCDs as nice as the apple ones? i have an apple one at work and its amazing...
Glossy, No Thanks!
Just returned from the Apple Store to look at the new MacBooks and was not impressed by the glossy displays. The reflection drove me nuts after about one minute. The black MacBook looks the coolest but is not worth an extra $200. Time will tell if Apple reconsiders their strategy on both of these decisions.
Just returned from the Apple Store to look at the new MacBooks and was not impressed by the glossy displays. The reflection drove me nuts after about one minute. The black MacBook looks the coolest but is not worth an extra $200. Time will tell if Apple reconsiders their strategy on both of these decisions.
Clix Pix said:
Yes, I would buy one in an instant also (financial situation permitting)! However, I doubt it will happen.
The size and weight of the new MacBooks is really disappointing.
ChrashM said:
In my use so far the glossy display isn't bad at all. Assuming you're looking at the screen straight on and there's not an inordinate amount of bright lighting, it's rather nice.
I suppose opinions will vary depending on people's native environments.
skywalker said:
How does the screen perform in high light situation, like when the sun is shining through the window?
swindmill said:
yes, i have it on my 12" pb...
http://www-users.kawo2.rwth-aachen.de/~razzfazz/iscroll2/
this driver gives scrolling and the two finger click option
swindmill said:
They're being built by Asus, who has a reputation for making bullet-proof machines. Mine seems very sturdy. I'm becoming very fond of the keyboard, as unorthodox as it looks.
Engadget's take
Engadget has a hands-on with the MacBook posted:
http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/17/hands-on-with-the-apple-macbook/
Of note:
They describe the display as being "less glossy than a Sony."
Some good pics too.
Engadget has a hands-on with the MacBook posted:
http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/17/hands-on-with-the-apple-macbook/
Of note:
They describe the display as being "less glossy than a Sony."
Some good pics too.
Thank you, finally someone who knows something.Chundles said:
You are all integratedist. Integrated Graphics are just that, a graphics chipset on the motherboard intead of stuck on a slot.
Technically there is nothing stopping them from being just as good as a 7900gt. However, no chipset is that good. They are made to be cheap and "Good enough"
That said, the GMA950 is a GOOD chipset!!! I'd say its comparable to a Nvidia 6600, except that its only got 64 megabytes of memory (shared)
The core* signature is like centrino, meaning that it has requirements.
One of them is the RAM, which is DDR2-667. Its FAST. Way faster than what does come on a 6600 card.
http://www.intel.com/products/chipsets/gma950/
before you knock it, research.
I found this pict of a black MacBook. Look at the greasy-looking track pad. Don't know if that is typical of the black model, or that user was just eating french fries or something.
For the life of me, I can't figure out why the 17" MBP weighs more than any of these laptops. And no Radeon X1800 in the MacBook? And why not price this obviously consumer laptop at $899? Apple could have done that. Think of all the sales they are missing out on ...
Garissimo said:
For the life of me, I can't figure out why the 17" MBP weighs more than any of these laptops. And no Radeon X1800 in the MacBook? And why not price this obviously consumer laptop at $899? Apple could have done that. Think of all the sales they are missing out on ...