More Details of the MacBook Pro

[nagromme]

Rosetta and AltiVec?

Now if only someone would put together a list of programs that won't run on these new Intel Macs.

Apple has said their pro apps (Soundtrack, Final Cut etc.) won't run--until an update coming in a couple months is out. So don't buy those apps now.

Meanwhile iLife and the apps that come with OS X are Intel native, and in theory, anything that states G3-compatibility should run (via Rosetta) too. Also, some apps (like Quake 3 engine games) that SAY they need a G4 will actually run on a G3: it's just that no G3 fast enough existed when the requirements were written. (Rosetta is G3-compatible, but that does not mean limited to G3 speeds.)

Beyond that, we'll have to see! I'm very curious to see whether Rosetta supports AltiVec now or not. Because in truth, I don't demand maximum raw speed from most apps I use: just being able to RUN them--at all--would be very nice. I look at most of the apps I use, and ask myself what I would think if I could run them twice as fast... and for MOST of them I don't care! Mail? Text editing? FTP? Lots of things don't demand max speed. I'd happily settle for them "just running" so that other apps (more and more of them over time) would run far faster. Apps I do care about speed for.

So the rumored AltiVec Rosetta translation would be a good thing even if it lacks AltiVec speed. Do we have that answer yet?

The other half of the question is speed: what apps does Rosetta run... at USEFUL speeds? I'm optimistic: apparently the devkits (which didn't even have real 3D boards) were running some 3D games (like Alice) at excellent speeds in Rosetta. And we've heard other examples too. Rosetta won't run as fast as native--but Core Duo is a faster chip to begin with, and that helps offset the penalty.

If we're comparing Rosetta-on-fast-Core-Duo to native-on-slow-G4, I think we may be pretty happy with the results overall. We'll know soon!

I thought the whole point of the yonah processor and going to the 65nm size is that it consumes less power and thus, burns your lap less.

Correction:

the whole point of the yonah processor and going to the 65nm size is that it consumes less power and thus, can run faster for the same power consumption.

But if Intel used 65nm to make chips that were no faster than the old chips, they would run cooler than the old chips.

Intel was making this big deal about how computer manufacturers could be really creative with case designs because the cooling doesn't have to be as elaborate.

Yes, but they were comparing to past Intel architectures, not to PowerBook G4s.

 

[Randall]

Actually this doesn't mean squat. Unless EFI has the Compatibility Support Module enabled XP will just sit there.

Uncle Steve said that he made sure the EFI compatibility support module was enabled, because he loves XP a lot.

 

[G.Kirby]

Definitely the last nail in the coffin for Classic and any OS9 apps that have dodged the OSX bullets. Classic will NOT run on the new Intel Macs.

OS9 R.I.P you did me proud……sinf!

 

[generik]

So did anyone see the quote from The Cult of Mac Blog on Wired.com

"He also said that if he were me, he probably wouldn't order one of the new MacBook Pros."

I wonder what that means?

Maybe it is a tablet PC.. who knows?

Or maybe it is Macbook TURBO

 

[immaculate]

mocked-up MacBook Pro image?

I don't know if this has been mentioned elsewhere on this site, but I can't find a reference in this thread: have you noticed that one of the images of the MacBook Pro on Apple's website looks like a PS-ed "mock up". The reflection doesn't match up to the machine... enlarge the thumbnail and you'll see what I mean. If this is old news, my apologies.

 

[271]

I've never used FW800 either, but I'd sure like to have FW800 anyway. This is their "pro" laptop. It even says so in the name!

FW800 is great for audio work and moving large files around between discs. it's just that much faster.

also, i have RME's fireface 800 which supports 400 and 800 but you can chain one onto the back of another for more i/o which is necessary to some people and can only be done w/the bandwidth available to FW800.

Of course this only represents a very small part of apple's market. perhaps in the future the FW800 will be added but my guess is anyone who really needs it will get somekind of FW800 pcmcia card or something.

but it's kind of irrelevant anyways since there isn't any audio software to run on the, uhg, macbook pro (garbageband doesn't count) and it will be quite a while until all the various apps can run natively not to mention the plug ins and drivers etc.

rossetta is useless for pro audio apps. seriously hamstrung.

all that being said it will be nice once the day rolls around when everything is shaking hands nicely and we can all run whatever we want on our uber fast mac portables. on our favorite OS.

 

[dejo]

I was wondering if the people who wanted a redesign (but didn't get one) could give us some more details about what they think are the shortcomings of the current styling and what they would like to see in a new styling. Just curious.

 

[Mr Maui]

I thought the whole point of the yonah processor and going to the 65nm size is that it consumes less power and thus, burns your lap less. Intel was making this big deal about how computer manufacturers could be really creative with case designs because the cooling doesn't have to be as elaborate.

Seomone said the air vents on the sides of the case have been removed, thus supporting the theory of coller running, but bear in mind that the videocard and other elemens also generate heat.

 

[G.Kirby]

I have had confirmation from Quark that QuarkXpress 6.x will work via Rosetta but would not give performance details. As for Adobe it looks like there will be no updates for current apps (CS – CS2) but the next release, CS3 will be Intel friendly. And that is due later this spring, fingers crossed.

 

[Mr Maui]

i can understand not uncluding the DL dvd burners. But isn't apple supposed to be backing Blue Ray Discs? FW800, they too a bet that there'd be more FW800 devices, but they never came. Consequently on my PB15, i've got the FW800 port that i need an adaptor for most of the time if i've got the other one occupied. i still think they're holding back for a few months before going all out...

I agree ... this book is to ease the transition and quelch the naysayers slightly until the BIG BANG!!

 

[ki-goi]

seconding the mention that a computer with bluetooth paired with a BT-enabled phone is much more useful than a modem - you get the networking alternative to ethernet/wifi plus caller ID on the computer, sync'd contacts & calendar, music from itunes on the phone, all that kind of junk.

 

[jazman]

No offence... but FW800 = completely useless.

I'm sorry, but it does sound really ignorant to say that you have never used FW800 and then say it's useless. You obviously don't do any video editing or move huge files around. There are a lot of photographers and video professionals that love the portability of a PB. You shouldn't talk about things that you know nothing about.

 

[nagromme]

I don't know if this has been mentioned elsewhere on this site, but I can't find a reference in this thread: have you noticed that one of the images of the MacBook Pro on Apple's website looks like a PS-ed "mock up". The reflection doesn't match up to the machine... enlarge the thumbnail and you'll see what I mean. If this is old news, my apologies.

Apple's product images are always heavily processed--they added a fake reflection to the "tabletop" but it doesn't mean anything. Some of Apple's product images are even 3D renders--and most of them have the on-screen image added in later.

Good eyes, though

I was wondering if the people who wanted a redesign (but didn't get one) could give us some more details about what they think are the shortcomings of the current styling and what they would like to see in a new styling. Just curious.

I think it's just that "new" is fun sometimes. (Others of course would howl in anger if the design changed.)

I like "new"--it can be exciting--but the current design has me sold. It's simple and it's anodized aluminum, which has proven VERY VERY scratch-resistant. My AlBook looks like new after 2 years of abuse. If they DO change the shape (maybe with Merom I'm thinking), don't change the material

Then again, I can't think what they could change about the shape... (But plastic consumer models could gain a black option.)

 

[mdavey]

I wonder if the lesser, single layer DVD writer really is necessary due to the form factor?

Okay, three facts for you:

1. The MacBook Pro is thinner than the Powerbook (it is also worth pointing out that the lid is actually thicker than the Powerbook lid).
2. The DVD writer is a super-slim model, not the slim model used in the Powerbook
3. There aren't any DL DVD writers in the super-slim form factor (at least, there aren't any at viable price-points)

Now, I don't know for certain that there is absolutely no way to fit a slim DVD writer into the MacBook Pro case but given points 1 and 2, it certainly seems plausible.

Edit: I doubt it will be long before DL super-slim drives are available, and at the right price. Expect a slient upgrade to shipping products in the near future

 

[Randall]

I'm sorry, but it does sound really ignorant to say that you have never used FW800 and then say it's useless. You obviously don't do any video editing or move huge files around. There are a lot of photographers and video professionals that love the portability of a PB. You shouldn't talk about things that you know nothing about.

I know it's theoretically 2x fast as FW400, but nothing has been able to use this kind of speed yet. There are some FW800 external drives, and some high end video equipment that use it. You could count them on one hand though. Face it, FW800 never took off, and it is pretty much useless.

 

[Reynish]

Rosetta emulates a G4

Apple has said their pro apps (Soundtrack, Final Cut etc.) won't run--until an update coming in a couple months is out. So don't buy those apps now.

Meanwhile iLife and the apps that come with OS X are Intel native, and in theory, anything that states G3-compatibility should run (via Rosetta) too. Also, some apps (like Quake 3 engine games) that SAY they need a G4 will actually run on a G3: it's just that no G3 fast enough existed when the requirements were written. (Rosetta is G3-compatible, but that does not mean limited to G3 speeds.)

Rosetta now emulates a G4, not a G3. This means all applications run, because no app requires a G5 (that I've heard of). So, every single app should run, but depending on the use of AltiVec code, performance will vary a lot. This means apps like Photoshop should get a fair speed hit. Then again, considering the new portables are 4 to 5 times faster, it would not surprise me if running Photoshop on a MBP was at least on par with running it on a PB.

 

[ZildjianKX]

I have had confirmation from Quark that QuarkXpress 6.x will work via Rosetta but would not give performance details. As for Adobe it looks like there will be no updates for current apps (CS – CS2) but the next release, CS3 will be Intel friendly. And that is due later this spring, fingers crossed.

Wow, that really sucks about CS2... figured they would release a patch and not make us upgrade/buy CS3... oh well.

I also think it is kind of cheap for Apple to charge for the Universal Binary Pro Apps CDs.

 

[shawnce]

*bounces around the room* Its going to be a long 33 days until my baby ships.

Should have gotten an iMac... some folks already got them delivered.

 

[Mr Maui]

Rosetta now emulates a G4, not a G3. This means all applications run, because no app requires a G5 (that I've heard of). So, every single app should run, but depending on the use of AltiVec code, performance will vary a lot. This means apps like Photoshop should get a fair speed hit. Then again, considering the new portables are 4 to 5 times faster, it would not surprise me if running Photoshop on a MBP was at least on par with running it on a PB.

4 to 5 times faster is on SPEC numbers, not real-world testing. I'd read these numbers with a grain of salt and a bit of skepticism. We'll get a better idea when the books start shipping and people can start offering real-world benchmarks.

 

[nagromme]

Rosetta now emulates a G4, not a G3.

That's the rumor, and I'm inclined to believe it, but is there confirmation from Apple on this?

(I actually wouldn't be surprised if Apple's pro apps DO run--just not at a performance level Apple would call acceptable for some things. So with fast, native versions on the way very soon, Apple just says they're not compatible.)

I also think it is kind of cheap for Apple to charge for the Universal Binary Pro Apps CDs.

Agreed. Charging SOMETHING for the disc is OK, but $49 each is a little harsh, just to transfer software you're already using onto a new machine you just paid Apple for.

 

[shawnce]

That's the rumor, and I'm inclined to believe it, but is there confirmation from Apple on this?

Rosetta supports AltiVec emulation now.

Review... http://developer.apple.com/document...l#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40002217-CH210-236747

 

[jazman]

I know it's theoretically 2x fast as FW400, but nothing has been able to use this kind of speed yet. There are some FW800 external drives, and some high end video equipment that use it. You could count them on one hand though. Face it, FW800 never took off, and it is pretty much useless.

In your world!

 

[nospleen]

I have already ordered mine, so I am biased. But, I think they are a vast improvement. The only thing I would change is I would have loved to have the option to order a black one.

 

[mcoyne]

I never used modem or FW800... ever.

No offence... but FW800 = completely useless.

Then you don't need a "pro" machine. Speak for yourself. FW800 is essential for anyone that works with with video or other extremely large files.

 

[virus1]

Bummer - No firewire, Target disk, etc.
these are good features.
Hopefullly some or all will be brought back in next rev.

no sweat.. i made the same mistake