Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Macbook Released

ManchesterTrix said:
No need to be a dick. Especially when you're wrong. Motion doesn't work and they haven't had time to update it for the MacBook? Please, then why isn't the mini on there, it's the same hardware.
Click to expand...

I think it might be a MM specialty...:rolleyes:

But... is this a case of unsupported but works? I've only seen one anecdotal report here of it working and the conditions for it working and the type of operations being done were not clear.

Has anyone tried it on the mini and found that it actually worked despite the requirements/supported list?
 
Gatezone said:
I think it might be a MM specialty...:rolleyes:

But... is this a case of unsupported but works? I've only seen one anecdotal report here of it working and the conditions for it working and the type of operations being done were not clear.

Has anyone tried it on the mini and found that it actually worked despite the requirements/supported list?
Click to expand...

If the mini is anything to go by, most of it works but isn't supported and Motion does not work at anything approaching usability.
 
I'm finally settled in with mine and have most of the apps that I need installed. It feels great and I really like it. But one issue that keeps really bugging me is that the colors seem washed out compared to my iMac. I've never owned a laptop and I really don't know what to expect from it.

For example, the icons in the dock menu aren't as bright and the colors aren't as deep as I'l like. Especially when I turn and look at the iMac screen. The iMac has great color.

Is this normal?
 
milo said:
... Considering how much you've posted about it, it's pretty obvious that you could care less. Much less. I still don't quite understand why people keep getting their panties in a bunch over an option. If you think it's a ripoff, don't buy it. "Problem" solved. Sure it can. But not at these price points. Weight or cost. Pick one.
Click to expand...

Problem is not solved. Problem is repositioned and a state of denial is established. One could ask why the true believers keep wearing their panties over their eyes :eek:

What I could care less about was the yellow nissan and the other exploitive coolness taxes on other products.

After the fact the Macbook is what it is. Don't run yesterday's papers up the flag pole and expect people to salute it. If it does what you want it to do and weighs what you want it to weigh then you're in luck. Snap it up. That's great. The views of those who want lighter, more flexible options, and to decide on their own if they are consumer, professional, or mixed use are an important part of the communication process and feedback particularly for other potential buyers who would like to avoid buyers regret.

Read carefully here.... great system if it fits your logistical and software needs. System might as well be a PC if it doesn't have the software (can you say native software boys and girls?) or the logistical specs for your needs. I care about that.
 
Leemo? Are You Not Able To Run Motion On Your MacBook?

ManchesterTrix said:
No need to be a dick. Especially when you're wrong. Motion doesn't work and they haven't had time to update it for the MacBook? Please, then why isn't the mini on there, it's the same hardware.
Click to expand...
YES IT WILL and NO it is NOT THE SAME HARDWARE. The Mini is running at 1.67 GHz while the MacBook is running at 2 GHz. That difference in speed will allow Motion to run. Leemo? Where are you on this Motion runs doesn't run thing?? We need a definitive report on Motion on your MacBook ASAP.
 
Multimedia said:
YES IT WILL and NO it is NOT THE SAME HARDWARE. The Mini is running at 1.67 GHz while the MacBook is running at 2 GHz. That difference in speed will allow Motion to run. Leemo? Where are you on this Motion runs doesn't run thing?? We need a definitive report on Motion on your MacBook ASAP.
Click to expand...

And yet, it's not the CPU that's the limiting factor in motion, it's the Graphics. I love how you're yelling that I'm wrong when you have no idea what you're talking about. Good job.
 
ManchesterTrix said:
And yet, it's not the CPU that's the limiting factor in motion, it's the Graphics. I love how you're yelling that I'm wrong when you have no idea what you're talking about. Good job.
Click to expand...

I'm telling you it's a specialty of MM's. :p
 
deadpoet said:
frankly it's annoying that people are trying to pass off the MacBook as adequate for playing modern 3D games, it clearly isn't.
Click to expand...

Who exactly would that be? I smell a straw man.

Great for 2d, including HD? Check. OK for old 3d games and some new 3d games at low resolutions? Check. For the most part, I think we're all in agreement that it's not going to smoke on Quake 4.

MacVault said:
What's the difference between the option of a super drive or the option of a better video card???
Click to expand...

The first is a simple swap, the second is a different mobo design. That's a substantial difference.

drumzkiqass said:
That means you can't run motion right?
Click to expand...

I don't know that that's been answered definitively yet. Can someone confirm if it runs or not? How is performance?
 
Getting sick of people complaining and saying the pro apps aren't going to run. Here's some screenshots of my MacBook having Logic, Motion and Final Cut Pro open.

My guess is that Apple won't want to advertise that it will do this kind of stuff - otherwise that's lots of potential MacBook Pro business out the window.

And FYI - all run amazingly.

-Leemo
 

Attachments

  • Fullscreen_1.jpg
    Fullscreen_1.jpg
    91 KB · Views: 158
  • Fullscreen_2.jpg
    Fullscreen_2.jpg
    62.8 KB · Views: 150
  • Fullscreen_3.jpg
    Fullscreen_3.jpg
    97.8 KB · Views: 173
Multimedia said:
And as long as you continute to try and spread FALSE RUMORS, there is EVERY REASON TO GO ON ABOUT IT.

FALSE RUMORMONGER.
Click to expand...

Multimedia, I am running one of these and have played with video a bit on it. It is 2.0Ghz with 2GB of RAM finally in place, and no, this is not the machine you want to cut video on, ok? I love this machine, but wrong choice for heavy video use or for editing lots of large images. Sorry, but encouraging people to think of this as an Avid is just misguided. As you haven't had your hands on one, I suggest that you listen to people who have experience with it.

Can it edit video and images? Sure. Is it the ideal machine for doing so? Well, the screen is small, so only when jacked into something larger, the bus runs at 667, which will soon be surpassed, and the largest drive that Apple will sell you is a 120GB. The largest after-market drive that I am aware of is 160GB. There is no Firewire 800. Light video and occasional editing of large images? Sure. Casting this as a video and image workstaion? Sorry Multi, but I just don't see it, and no amount of your obnoxious slandering of users who disagree with you here.

If I am buying a machine for editing video and large images, I wait for something with a faster bus and Firewire 800, and for me, a larger screen (not pixel count...screen size). The faster bus is 3 months away, and counseling people with these needs that a MacBook 13" will suit them is wrong. This is a great machine to tote around, and use for playing media, light editing of media, word processing, browsing and other relatively light chores. It was never meant to be a media production workstation.

As for your attacks on people in your previous post, me thinks it may be time for some folks to take their meds. I thought that kind of stuff was only permitted at AI. You have every right to disagree, and to post your opinions. I suggest, however, that the bold-type insults cease.
 
ripfrankwhite said:
I'm finally settled in with mine and have most of the apps that I need installed. It feels great and I really like it. But one issue that keeps really bugging me is that the colors seem washed out compared to my iMac. I've never owned a laptop and I really don't know what to expect from it.

For example, the icons in the dock menu aren't as bright and the colors aren't as deep as I'l like. Especially when I turn and look at the iMac screen. The iMac has great color.

Is this normal?
Click to expand...

I dunno, compared to every other Mac notebook I've used the color is downright brilliant.

The screen is rather picky when it comes to horizontal and vertical viewing angle. Make sure it's tilted correctly and you're looking at it straight on.

Also, oddly, I've noticed it looks better in moderate light than in the dark.
 
Dick Knows?

Leemo said:
Getting sick of people complaining and saying the pro apps aren't going to run. Here's some screenshots of my MacBook having Logic, Motion and Final Cut Pro open. My guess is that Apple won't want to advertise that it will do this kind of stuff - otherwise that's lots of potential MacBook Pro business out the window. And FYI - all run amazingly. -Leemo
Click to expand...

Uh oh... does this mean dick is right? :eek: Oops, Netdog has a balanced and reasoned answer that supercedes the screen shots.
 
Multimedia said:
YES IT WILL and NO it is NOT THE SAME HARDWARE. The Mini is running at 1.67 GHz while the MacBook is running at 2 GHz. That difference in speed will allow Motion to run. Leemo? Where are you on this Motion runs doesn't run thing?? We need a definitive report on Motion on your MacBook ASAP.
Click to expand...

You are possibly the most annoying person I have ever experienced here in two years. :)
 
Gatezone said:
Should we talk about the engineering skill necessary to create the iPod video player? But it's too much to have a case, system board, and components that can handle options like we are talking about here? I don't buy it.
Click to expand...
Neither do I. Desktop and tower PCs have onboard graphics and a slot for an optional graphics board. Can't Apple do the same?
 
Motion 2 Can Run With Limited Functionality, Final Cut Pro Runs Great

ManchesterTrix said:
And yet, it's not the CPU that's the limiting factor in motion, it's the Graphics. I love how you're yelling that I'm wrong when you have no idea what you're talking about. Good job.
Click to expand...
The integrated graphics in the MacBook are not so poor that you cannot get SOME functionality out of Limited Parts of Motion 2. What I am challenging is your assertion that Motion 2 doesn't run AT ALL. I think it will run in a LIMITED CAPACITY.

Moreover your main assertion that Final Cut Pro won't run is just plain WRONG.

Also Soundtrack Pro and DVD Studio 4 will run fine too. So stop saying MacBook is not a decent platform for Final Cut Studio. 3 of 4 completely and the fourth with limited capability - NOT never. You both inspire the DICK in me. :D
Leemo said:
Post #2018 - Getting sick of people complaining and saying the pro apps aren't going to run. Here's some screenshots of my MacBook having Logic, Motion and Final Cut Pro open.

My guess is that Apple won't want to advertise that it will do this kind of stuff - otherwise that's lots of potential MacBook Pro business out the window.

And FYI - all run amazingly.

-Leemo
Click to expand...
Go to Post 2018 to see the screen shots. MOTION WORKS. Now who's the real DICK here??!
 
Multimedia said:
The integrated graphics in the MacBook are not so poor that you cannot get SOME functionality out of Limited Parts of Motion 2. What I am challenging is your assertion that Motion 2 doesn't run AT ALL. I think it will run in a LIMITED CAPACITY.
Click to expand...

I said Motion doesn't work. Which to be more specific, I meant it's not usable.

Moreover your main assertion that Final Cut Pro won't run is just plain WRONG.
Click to expand...

I never even implied that let alone asserted that. I said it wasn't supported, and it isn't and won't be. So you know, maybe you should read what I say before you make yourself look more foolish.
 
PaulinMaryland said:
Neither do I. Desktop and tower PCs have onboard graphics and a slot for an optional graphics board. Can't Apple do the same?
Click to expand...

As much as I rant about how there could be more respect paid to the mixed use of computers, matticus and others points are valid. Particularly when Apple has been going down this laptop road for awhile. They could do more, hopefully they will, and it is disappointing (sorry folks) that they didn't diverge from their beaten path a bit more as they had the chance with the new releases. They were obviously under yet another processor priority deadline 'gun' and had to get these out or else...

Once you're hanging by a branch from the side of a huge cliff it's hard to re-engineer your graphics choices. All you care about is when is Adobe going to get their native aps out the door to support your most loyal users.
 
It is probably just the drive speed, but this 2.0 MacBook is not as snappy as my 2.0 iMac. I wonder if it is underclocked. In any case, their is a noticeable difference in speed between the two machines. That said, this MacBook is fantastic.
 
MrCrowbar said:
Am I the only one actually GLAD the Macbooks have the GMA? Do you know how much battery a dedicated graphics card takes? I bet you would have 1 hour less battery with a dedicated GPU and everyone would complain about that....Same goes for 7200 rpm hard drive. Granted the performance on a 7200 rpm drive is better, but it all goes on the battery.
Click to expand...
Point well taken! I'll be buying the MacBook with the slowest CPU for the same reason. Performance is nice to have if you can replace the battery with a spare. But when your battery is captive, as it is in the MacBook (correct?), efficiency matters more.
 
netdog said:
It is probably just the drive speed, but this 2.0 MacBook is not as snappy as my 2.0 iMac. I wonder if it is underclocked. In any case, their is a noticeable difference in speed between the two machines. That said, this MacBook is fantastic.
Click to expand...

Load the speedit kernel extension, it'll allow you to find out your current frequency on the CPU. http://www.increw.com/open_source/speedit_kernel_extension/speedit.html
 
ManchesterTrix said:
Depends on your definition of "Amazingly."
Click to expand...

Hey don't worry I'm not trying to argue with you in relation to the performance of such programs on it - personally for my needs (having used a powermac G5, then a MacBook Pro and now my MacBook) I've found the performance to be barely any different to the MacBook Pro that I used for a few months.

Whilst ok it's got a smaller hard drive than you might want for video editing, I just take the required material with me on the hard drive anyway, which is fine for me. Personally I find the screen a pleasure to use, only on occasion have the smaller dimensions seemed a hinderence during editing - but that's to be expected in a portable, and really not as bad as I thought it would be.

My argument is that this little machine does far and away what I expected of it (so much so that I've got rid of my MacBook Pro) and for my video, audio and photo editing needs it's an amazing bit of kit.

2ghz MacBook that runs Pro Apps extremely well for £780? Couldn't ask for more.

-Leemo
 
Release the batteries

PaulinMaryland said:
...But when your battery is captive, as it is in the MacBook (correct?), efficiency matters more.
Click to expand...

What does this mean "your battery is captive?"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back