MacBook, MacBook Pro and Ultra-Portable Updates

[cube]

I'd really encourage you to try to spend a significant period of time using a Sony TX and then decide whether you could use one as your only computer.

Well, of course I would use it with an external monitor, keyboard and mouse at home. I'm using a 1.8 GHz G4 with no L3 cache on a 100 MHz bus, so such a computer should be faster than that.

The Asus S6 I'm talking about has a 2.5" hard disk and is better than the Sony. It doesn't have LED backlight, but it still weighs only 1.3 or 1.5 kg depending on the battery you put in.

There's a lighter Asus at 1 kg with LED backlight, but it uses a 1.8" hd, has worse gfx, and no gigabit ethernet or FireWire.

 

[EagerDragon]

I really don't see how a portable with a 13" screen can be described as "Ultra-Portable", no matter how thin it is.



You forgot about the resolution-independant interface for Leopard and beyond. In fact, the smaller the pixels are, the better it will be.

I agree 13 inch is too big for an ultra, 12 is more reasonable and 11 or 10 better for young folks.

The resolution independance may be great for us old folks depending on two things:
1) Needs Leopard to be avaialble first
2) Need lots more pixels to make those tiny characters easier to read.

At this time with no resolution independance I can not read the text on a 30" monitor, however the 24" one is almost perfectly readable without resolution independance. Sorry not a young fella.

9" and smaller and you are into the large PDA teritory.

 

[MrCrowbar]

At this time with no resolution independance I can not read the text on a 30" monitor, however the 24" one is almost perfectly readable without resolution independance. Sorry not a young fella.

Don't the 30" monitors have the same PPI ratio as the 24"?
Oh wait, there's no 24" cinema display. There's a 24" iMac however...

Resolution Independence is awesome!

 

[EagerDragon]

Don't the 30" monitors have the same PPI ratio as the 24"?
Oh wait, there's no 24" cinema display. There's a 24" iMac however...

Resolution Independence is awesome!

Yes I was refering to the iMac 24, great screen, no idea what the PPI ratio is.

 

[iJawn108]

Ultra portable with glossy black carbon fiber chassis. Ohhhh that'd be nice, though not useful for me. I do use my optical drive quite frequently i burn DVDs every single day.

 

[Zadillo]

At the time, floppies were not considered obsolete, at least not in the Windows world. Apple's rejection of the floppy drive and mass marketing of a read/write optical drive was one of the factors that lead to the floppy drive's obsolescence.

As for marketing an ultraportable as an only computer, this is unlikely. The size of an ultraportable limits its usability to some extent. The target market is professionals who have a desktop Mac at home and want something to use while commuting, IMO. The key features will focus on syncing data with your home computer.

It wasn't the lack of inclusion of a floppy drive in the PowerBook 2400 though - that didn't set anything off really.

It was the lack of a floppy drive on the iMac that really set the demise of the floppy drive in motion..... combined with the adoption of USB only, which led to the creation of a lot more USB devices (I don't think the iMac was the first computer to use USB, but I think it was the first mainstream one to really require USB).

 

[Zadillo]

I agree 13 inch is too big for an ultra, 12 is more reasonable and 11 or 10 better for young folks.

The resolution independance may be great for us old folks depending on two things:
1) Needs Leopard to be avaialble first
2) Need lots more pixels to make those tiny characters easier to read.

At this time with no resolution independance I can not read the text on a 30" monitor, however the 24" one is almost perfectly readable without resolution independance. Sorry not a young fella.

9" and smaller and you are into the large PDA teritory.

I'm only 27 and I find the 11" screen to be too small to be practically useable. The only solution is to increase text size, and at that point you no longer have an easy view of your document as a whole.

 

[ncbill]

The spaces are significantly wider on my MacBook's keyboard, which is a throwback to the 1980s.

The 12" Aluminum Powerbook I have has nicely beveled keys, which are easier to use than the straight, flat, "chicklet" keys on the MacBook.

That's not even considering the lack of key travel on the MacBook keyboard (I'm not a touch typist, but I've seen complaints about that)

Backlit would be nice for all portables, but I'd also hope for a decent keyboard, like on the AlBook's.

Those spaces are the same width as the slanted edges of the PowerBook/MacBook Pro keys, so they are pretty much exactly the same to type on, and I'm guessing you have not tried for more than a few minutes (though I'm ready to be corrected). I actually really like the MacBook keyboard and would like to see it return in many future Apple products (hopefully backlit too [maybe thats one of the non-Santa Rosa or LED screen related upgrades for the next MacBook revision]).

EDIT: Beaten by 2 people

 

[g3ski]

9" and smaller and you are into the large PDA teritory.

9"-12" is ultra-portabale. 5"-9" is the UMPC/MicroPC arena. 1-5" is PDA range.

I cannot understand why Apple would even consider a UMPC with a 13" screen? Moreover, why a rumorist would suggest it. It makes no sense. It won't be much lighter than the macbook, so what's the point.

It will have to be a 10-12" screen and in the 2-3lb range for it be competitive as an ultra-portable, as well as differentiating with the macbook.

I have not problem with an external optical to lower weight/size, but there are PCs with internal optical in the 2.9-3.2lb range.

 

[macjay]

Apple following Sony's lead

Assuming the rumors are true, Apple's "ultra-portable" 13" will be to the Macbook what the Sony SZ series is to the Sony C series. Both Sony's are 13". Sony calls the SZ series "ultra-portable" (and the C series "thin and light"). Do any of these adjectives sound familiar?

Wasn't there a story awhile back that Apple had hired some former Sony engineers for their "ultra-portable" endeavour?

Sony SZ:
http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INT...VAIONotebookComputers_SZSeries&Dept=computers
http://www.amazon.com/Sony-VGN-SZ47...2?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1178989375&sr=1-8

Sony C:
http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INT..._VAIONotebookComputers_CSeries&Dept=computers
http://www.amazon.com/Sony-VGN-C240...2?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1178989375&sr=1-6

It appears that Sony is describing the SZ as "ultra-portable" based on weight, not screen size.

 

[Zadillo]

Assuming the rumors are true, Apple's "ultra-portable" 13" will be to the Macbook what the Sony SZ series is to the Sony C series. Both Sony's are 13". Sony calls the SZ series "ultra-portable" (and the C series "thin and light"). Do any of these adjectives sound familiar?

Wasn't there a story awhile back that Apple had hired some former Sony engineers for their "ultra-portable" endeavour?

Sony SZ:
http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INT...VAIONotebookComputers_SZSeries&Dept=computers
http://www.amazon.com/Sony-VGN-SZ47...2?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1178989375&sr=1-8

Sony C:
http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INT..._VAIONotebookComputers_CSeries&Dept=computers
http://www.amazon.com/Sony-VGN-C240...2?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1178989375&sr=1-6

It appears that Sony is describing the SZ as "ultra-portable" based on weight, not screen size.

There's something to be said for this. I owned a premium SZ which was only 3.7 pounds, and it felt very light, and the "footprint" of it wasn't that relevant to me.

Calling the C series "thin and light" is silly on Sony's part though.... it is much thicker than the SZ series, and heavier too. The MacBook is much more "thin and light" than the C series is.

 

[chambers7]

Million Dollar Question

So... if this rumor is true and the Macbook is really not getting updated at all... Should i go Macbook pro? I have up to $3000 to spend, but i don't need the pro and I would like a very portable one.

Here are the variables:

I'm wondering what labtop system I should buy for my needs.

I almost always run iTunes and run web browsing and word processing. I am a college student and I want to be able to easily carry the labtop around with me.
I would do some video editing (not professional) on iMovie.

I've been waiting for the LED screens and Santa Rosa, and I really want both, but if macbook doesn't have either (and I need a labtop this summer) should i just go pro???

Please help me. Thanks very much.
GO !

 

[wcalderini]

One solution.

What I was thinking.
Seeing as how "flash" drives have been dropping in price recently.
Why not put the OS Backup on a copy protected thumb drive?
What would be REALLY cool, and I would not put it past Apple to incorporate something like this design wise, would be an internal "thumb drive" slot, so your asthetics would not be messed up by a "dongle". Of course this would entail a "proprietary" thumb drive size and all, but it's not like Apple has not taken those types of design leaps in the past.
The more I think about it, and the more I also think of the frgility and durability of DVD's, CD's, and other wear vulnerable and scratchable media, it would make a WHOLE lot of sense for the entire market for all media to eventually move to this form factor. (Software vendors, DVD Movies, CD's, etc.)
It's a brave new world I envision.
Maybe Apple could be thinking that way too.

WRC

 

[cube]

That already exists. It's called a memory card.

Think how much it would cost 4,5, or now with BluRay 50 GB of flash instead of a disc. Each time.

No way.

 

[HFU]

SR platform won't support DDR2-800 initially

So basically it is worse on energy and barely runs better (according to them anyway) and the turbomemory thing only works with Vista....

Turbo Memory probably won't be supported in revision-A of SR MBP until Leopard is ready around Q3.

After a closer look at the SR platform specification, the initial release of the SR notebook won't support DDR2-800 as stated in Intel data sheet. Intel (may/may not) add DDR2-800 support in the later revision of SR platform or wait until Montevina platform due out in 2008 with DDR3-800 support.

 

[rjc]

The rumored ultra-portable could be any number of things, but I find it difficult to imagine Apple making it smaller than 13".

First, the 12" Powerbook wasn't wide-screen, and I doubt that Apple would go back to a non-widescreen display.

With that said, an ultra-portable could still be smaller than the 13" Macbook. There's a little bit of room between the edge of the keyboard and the edge of the case, and the display has a wide bezel. In theory, Apple could save some room there.

If Apple were able to find LCDs with 160dpi (like the iPhone), they could make the screen 10" and it would still be very usable. The problem they'd run into is that there's no room for a full-size keyboard.

There's definitely demand for a replacement for the 12" Powerbook, but I think people want a computer that's going to be pretty robust in terms of screen size, keyboard, and performance.

Developing a true 11" ultra-portable would lots of engineering resources for a product with a small market which will end up being obsolete in 1-2 years when it gets replaced by an 10" touchscreen tablet based on iPhone technology. (OK, maybe not, but here's hoping.)

 

[Mydel]

I REALLY hope they dont use those Samsung displays... the resolution still is tthat 1440x900... I want a resolution bump!!! Makes me consider a Dell Latitude, at least then I can pick a screen resolution...

I already asked in some different thread, but got no answer. Are there ANY LED screens (15.4") on the market with resolution greater than 1440x900??

 

[natejohnstone@g]

The more I think about it, and the more I also think of the frgility and durability of DVD's, CD's, and other wear vulnerable and scratchable media, it would make a WHOLE lot of sense for the entire market for all media to eventually move to this form factor. (Software vendors, DVD Movies, CD's, etc.)
It's a brave new world I envision.
Maybe Apple could be thinking that way too.
WRC

I agree with this in theory, but right now cost is the main factor. CDs and DVDs are so cheap right now that they are basically disposable. And more to the point, you can burn something that just GIVE it to the person, which is quite handy if they don't have their computer with them at the time. With Flash memory, you could never afford to give someone the data, you'd have to load it onto their computer. I doubt they'll ever mass-produce 10GB flash cards for 50 cents each.
Because of convenience and cost, we're a few years away from getting ready of optical-type media.

Everyone keeps talking about how "innovative" and "foresighted" it was for Apple to get rid of floppy drives for the iMac. But I TOTALLY disagree! I was in college at the time, and it was a major pain in the @$$ to not have floppy drives in those computers. My college hadn't yet moved to server storage options, and no one could afford cd burners. So everyone with Macs were forced to buy the external floppy drives. So what was the point? Apple was at least a year too early on that one.
With an "ultraportable" this is even more of an issue, since a necessary external drive on an ultra portable is completely ridiculous.

 

[AidenShaw]

At the time, floppies were not considered obsolete, at least not in the Windows world.

Floppies were more or less obsolete in the Windows world as well, at least for user data transport.

What kept them as standard equipment was that they were a ubiquitous solution for booting firmware updates, diagnostics and shipping most drivers.

Apple's rejection of the floppy drive and mass marketing of a read/write optical drive was one of the factors that lead to the floppy drive's obsolescence.

Check your history books (and old MacRumors posts).

The "iMac" was introduced in August 1998 (sans floppy).

It wasn't until the "iMac SE (Early 2001)" that the iMac had a recordable optical drive.

There was a lot of moaning on the "Mac Web" about why Apple was so slow in releasing recordable optical drives.

 

[dongmin]

I have the Sony TX series Laptop and it is the perfect combination of size/weight/performance. If it only ran Mac OS X it would be ideal. If sony can make a computer this size, then apple should be able to match it. At this point I wouldn't even consider a mac laptop just because they are SO HUGE! Granted some people use them as replacement desktops, fine, but they are nothing close to an ideal ultraportable. Guess the closest Apple came to it was the 12" G4, which they no longer make.

No one has yet to mention that for $2700 (basically the price of a 17" MBP), the best you get in the Sony TX series is a 1.33 Core SOLO ULV. That's an awful lot to pay to sacrifice so much power. And basically not much of an improvement over a PowerBook 12".

 

[Mydel]

Those rumored specs are ridiculous. Here is what it MUST have:

- Screen no bigger than 11", LED backlight
- DVD+-RW DL
- 160GB hard disk or bigger
- Core 2 Duo

Why would apple bother selling a worse computer than Asus (I don't say "making" because Apple does not build anything, maybe even Asus could be contracted to produce the "ultraportable").

Why in the name of GOD on ultrapotable laptop you need optical and 160GB hard drive???? It is NOT primary computer its for traveling you know....

 

[Hunabku]

What about 17 inch MB Pro LEDs?

So are we gonna see the release of the 17 in. MB Pro without LED backlighting but with all the other updates? I am ready to buy a updated 17 in and would be very happy even if it didn't have LED backlighting.

Any ideas?

 

[Wolfpup]

So... if this rumor is true and the Macbook is really not getting updated at all... Should i go Macbook pro? I have up to $3000 to spend, but i don't need the pro and I would like a very portable one.

Here are the variables:

I'm wondering what labtop system I should buy for my needs.

I almost always run iTunes and run web browsing and word processing. I am a college student and I want to be able to easily carry the labtop around with me.
I would do some video editing (not professional) on iMovie.

I've been waiting for the LED screens and Santa Rosa, and I really want both, but if macbook doesn't have either (and I need a labtop this summer) should i just go pro???

Please help me. Thanks very much.
GO !

WHY do you want Santa Rosa or LED backlighting? If you like the tiny size of the Macbook, the current model would work fine for what you describe.

***********************
New thought...we need a separate thread for people who actually want to talk about the Macbook Pro. I'm tired of bizaro-world where a 13" notebook that's actually unusably small with it's teeny tiny screen and chicklet keyboard is "huuuuuuge", and people are too weak to carry it (let alone carry the "huuuuuuge" 6.8lb 17" model )
I must have super-strength.

 

[Zadillo]

I agree with this in theory, but right now cost is the main factor. CDs and DVDs are so cheap right now that they are basically disposable. And more to the point, you can burn something that just GIVE it to the person, which is quite handy if they don't have their computer with them at the time. With Flash memory, you could never afford to give someone the data, you'd have to load it onto their computer. I doubt they'll ever mass-produce 10GB flash cards for 50 cents each.
Because of convenience and cost, we're a few years away from getting ready of optical-type media.

Everyone keeps talking about how "innovative" and "foresighted" it was for Apple to get rid of floppy drives for the iMac. But I TOTALLY disagree! I was in college at the time, and it was a major pain in the @$$ to not have floppy drives in those computers. My college hadn't yet moved to server storage options, and no one could afford cd burners. So everyone with Macs were forced to buy the external floppy drives. So what was the point? Apple was at least a year too early on that one.
With an "ultraportable" this is even more of an issue, since a necessary external drive on an ultra portable is completely ridiculous.

But let's face it, it had to happen. We weren't going to move away from floppy drives until some company somewhere had the guts to do away with them entirely, and force the development and mainstreaming of things like CD burners, USB flash drives, etc.

 

[zap2]

That's an awful lot to pay to sacrifice so much power. And basically not much of an improvement over a PowerBook 12".

Core Sole is a good amount better then G4...the Core Solo in the Mac Mini(when it was first released) was about as fast as my 1.8Ghz G5.


Unless the Low powered Core Solo loses tons of speed vs the high powered one(which don't think happen, just the low powered one costs more) then the speed is a large improvement over 12'' PPC i/PowerBook.


That said, I wish Apple would use a 12'' for the Ultra-Portable. I really don't want to "upgrade" to a 13'' laptop from my 12'' iBook.