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

My First MacBook Experience -- A First Timers Review So Far

Sesshi said:
... - Cleartype is clearly superior to OS X's type rendering in terms of legibility, especially on notebook screens...
Click to expand...

Now this must be the reason why OS X is the industry standard for graphic designers.🙄

But well, as long as it makes you happy.
 
WannaGoMac said:
Well, I was given a Macbook C2D to do some work on. After a few days with it here are some observations.

...
6) Text is blurry. I just can't stand the Apple font rendering. To me it is blurry. I don't care if it doesn't accurately represent the font as it will appear on paper. What I care about is that in my browser all the text is blurry. I adjusted the smoothing both from high to low, no difference. ClearType IMHO is better.

Basically, I still "WannaGoMac" but the hardware just is not a match for me. Maybe Apple will release a sub-notebook that will address the weight and heat issue so I can finally buy an Apple laptop.

After this experience (the font blurriness) I am now hesitant at buying the Mac Mini next month (waiting for Leopard) as I was planning.
Click to expand...

I use XP and Vista and now have a Mac at home and at the office. At first, the font difference was annoying. A month later I am starting to prefer the Mac. One thing that helps is to go into System Preferences/Appearance and set the font smoothing to "light"
 
chaosbunny said:
Now this must be the reason why OS X is the industry standard for graphic designers.🙄

But well, as long as it makes you happy.
Click to expand...

You know, I was going to be tactful. I even thought about adding the bit that would have headed you off. I was pretty much expecting your post.

Perhaps all of my posts should have a link to a disclaimer so people who have no clue what they're talking about can reference it instead of making smartarse comments that come back to bite them in the ass.

Font representation onscreen is critical for designers and OS X generally speaking manages that better than Cleartype.

However, font legibility onscreen is far more important for the bigger majority of users who are not graphic design professionals and Cleartype does a better job of that.

And to floptical, the Q35 - the other, far more directly comparable example which you didn't seize on - came out at about the same time as the Macbook.
 
I've heard some people say the Macbooks run hot because too much thermal paste was put into them, and in the incorrect way. I think Apple's official position is more that they are notebooks and not laptops. They'd probably tell you not to keep it on your body. I don't have a laptop now, but when I did, I always found it more comfortable to rest it on a pillow that was on top of my lap.
 
Sesshi said:
You know, I was going to be tactful. I even thought about adding the bit that would have headed you off. I was pretty much expecting your post.

Perhaps all of my posts should have a link to a disclaimer so people who have no clue what they're talking about can reference it instead of making smartarse comments that come back to bite them in the ass.

Font representation onscreen is critical for designers and OS X generally speaking manages that better than Cleartype.

However, font legibility onscreen is far more important for the bigger majority of users who are not graphic design professionals and Cleartype does a better job of that.

And to floptical, the Q35 - the other, far more directly comparable example which you didn't seize on - came out at about the same time as the Macbook.
Click to expand...

Oh my good how could I dare to argue with you.

Btw, if everything mac and OS X sucks so much (according to most of your posts), what are you doing on a mac related forum? This is an honest question.
 
Just a side-note

Sesshi said:
Font representation onscreen is critical for designers and OS X generally speaking manages that better than Cleartype.
Click to expand...


Given that type is usually typeset on 2400dpi image-setters and CTP devices, type on screen is never taken as an indication of how things really look, on any display.

If I really need to see — as best as possible within a small-sized studio — how my type looks, I'll run it out at 1200dpi on a decent post-script equipped laser printer and even then, that can be deceptive especially with very fine characters.

Regardless of the application and how much it leans on Quartz, the subtlety of kerning, word-spacing and character forms is often inconsistently displayed at varying magnification sizes whichever app you use.

So, font represenation, when it's been an issue in the industry, has had more to do with an individual app. For instance, Quark's onscreen rendering used to be very poor until they rewrote Quark to use Quartz instead of QuickDraw.
 
I guess we are all in agreement that Apple really needs to step up on their Mac hardware. Maybe they're just too focused on their electronics division to bother with macs anymore?

As for font rendering (above poster using phrase "font legibility onscreen" is right on for description), I agree with above that I (and non-graphic designer types) need want a display that looks sharp and clear on screen. I don't give a fig if it isn't what is printed. Shouldn't that be what print preview is for??

I tried turning it to "light" still was just awful as compared to ClearType or Windows XP display.

BTW, is there a page up and page down key equivalent? When I use Option+Arrow down in the web browser it jumps to the bottom of the web page, I like to read by paging down one page at a time. Anything like that in OS X?
 
I can't speak for the MacBooks because I've never used one, but the case design of the MacPro towers and the MBPs are getting a little long in the tooth. I'm hoping that we'll see something new and different very soon that is as stringently-designed and well-engineered as 99% of Mac buyers need.

I like my MBP though. Does the job very well, for me.
 
WannaGoMac said:
...BTW, is there a page up and page down key equivalent? When I use Option+Arrow down in the web browser it jumps to the bottom of the web page, I like to read by paging down one page at a time. Anything like that in OS X?
Click to expand...

Using the fn key + up/down arrow key should do that.
 
flopticalcube said:
Don't forget the MacBook is now around 1 1/2 years old. In technology terms it is really yesterdays news. When an Apple product comes out it is generally cutting edge stuff so the new MB (due anytime between Leopard and MWSF 2008) will probably follow this tradition.
Click to expand...

Dream on. 😉 It mat be ancient in general technology terms, but not in Apple's typical timeline. Even with Intel they don't seem to be in sync with the rest of the world much of the time. From Apple's point of view, the Macbook isn't nearly old enough to warrant a redesign. Look at the Mac Pro and Macbook Pro. Same basic design for over 4 years (going back to Power Mac G5 and PowerBook G4). They've gotten new motherboards/cpus a few times (obviously, especially for the Intel transition) but are otherwise not much different.

For the Macbook I expect a speed bump in the timeframe you're talking about - between now and the end of January. If we're lucky, they might go to Santa Rosa, but I consider that unlikely because it would again bring the Macbooks too close to the Macbook Pros.

It'll be a few more years before the Macbook (or its successor) becomes "cutting edge" again.
 
flopticalcube said:
It gets over 7 hours of battery life?
Click to expand...

If we're comparing Apple's completely ideal results with what I get in real life out of the Q35, which I'm sure is the fanboy's way of comparing, the Samsung loses very badly.

Blue Velvet said:
So, font represenation, when it's been an issue in the industry, has had more to do with an individual app. For instance, Quark's onscreen rendering used to be very poor until they rewrote Quark to use Quartz instead of QuickDraw.
Click to expand...

It was in the context of Cleartype vs Quartz. It wasn't a reflection on the wider state of font representation by application.

Despite the fact that you do indeed have to check your results on some draft device, it's also true that Quartz has a higher degree of fidelity to how things will look when typeset than what Windows font handling can manage. It's not always an issue - I believe from experience that a talented designer can work equally well in Windows or Mac especially with the parity of professional-level tools these days - However, in the practical everyday usage of non graphic designers Windows definitely has the edge of font rendering with a view to legibility, especially on laptops.
 
Cybergypsy said:
Are you kidding had a sony Vaio and was sooooo bulky and hot........😱
Click to expand...

The real question is, how bulky / hot / slow were the equivalent portable Macs at the time, and how much more did they cost?

I mean, comparisons are all very well but all I see on this forum is people comparing shrunken, rancid, old-age / uber-budget Oranges against brand new Apples.

chaosbunny said:
Oh my good how could I dare to argue with you.
Click to expand...

Glad to see you agree.

Btw, if everything mac and OS X sucks so much (according to most of your posts), what are you doing on a mac related forum? This is an honest question.
Click to expand...

It may well be the drift of Macbook "Pros", the iMac, the "Pros" and the XServes that I use. It may well be that a very important part of what I do runs on OS X on hardware that's considerably inferior to what I can get elsewhere.

I have no qualms with the OS, although I'd stop at calling it outright superior to Windows.
 
Perhaps it is just me, but I think Apple doesn't care about Macs anymore.

They used to be the first to add the latest technologies to their products -- WIFI, Firewire, etc. Now, they basically play keep up with the jones.

For example, these old designs, why didn't they add an eSATA port -- the real future of external devices? What about a flash drive option? etc..

Apple makes basically boring PCs that are enabled to run OS X. Too bad they won't just sell OS X and have a list of "approved" hardware that they support.
 
WannaGoMac said:
They used to be the first to add the latest technologies to their products -- WIFI, Firewire, etc. Now, they basically play keep up with the jones.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Yes, Apple is often on the bleeding edge with new tech (Wifi, Firewire as you mentioned, Core Duo, Xeon 3.0ghz, Core 2 Extreme Mobile, SATA mobile hdds) but they often also skip over a lot of technology that doesn't give an immediate and advantage that justifies the increased cost / complexity of adding the technology.

Flash? Have you seen benchmarks on Windows Ready boost / Robson / hybrid hard drives / etc? And not "Intel uberbenchmarks" but real benchmarks from production machines - for example, the new Thinkpads. Basically, very little improvement currently. When good high performance mobile flash technology is available, I'm sure Apple will consider it more seriously, and we will see it in a Macbook.

eSata? Personally, I'd love to see it. But I can also understand why they haven't added it - it's pretty nontrivial from a technical point of view because the Intel mobile chipsets (AFAIK) only support two ATA or SATA devices. In what environment does having an eSATA port help, today? I saw the previous example of booting Vista from an extarnal drive - why not from a partition on the internal drive? Also, look at the benchmarks. While 1.5gbps sounds so much quicker than 800mbps FW, but the truth is you won't find an external hdd (except for some crazy 8 drive raid array) that will be limited by FW 800. Maybe there will be slight latency advantages, but they will be small.

I'd also love to see an 8700 in a Macbook Pro - but once again, you have to look at the technical aspects / temperature / size / etc. It's a judgement from Apple's side - is the extra size and weight worth it for the performance increase? Furthermore, how old is the current revision? The 8700 wasn't out when the launched the current revision (although I'm sure they new about it) - they obviously decided it wasn't worth delaying the revision for.

I don't always agree with Apples decisions (why oh why can't I buy a 13.3" macbook with an 8400m?), but I don't think it's fair to say that they are "basically keeping up with the Jones' "
 
I've also got a C2D macbookpro. And all I can say is wow. I made the switch from an Alienware desktop to a macbookpro andi must say it's impressive. I love that I can take it on the road with me and be able to connect flawlessly anywhere W-Fi is!!
 
I will add that networking from the Macbook to my XP computers worked BETTER than the way it works between the XP computers.

I have had a bug for months (years now)where I can't find (network browse) or connect to my XP desktops using their names. I have had to use IP numbers to communicate between the XP computers!!

OS X found them instantly with their proper names! Once I logged in with my account on each XP box it worked beautifully.
 
BrettFarve04 said:
I made the switch from an Alienware desktop to a macbookpro andi must say it's impressive.
Click to expand...

I have an Alienware laptop. Now THAT gets hot. It has a full on desktop CPU in it and it boils.

I've trashed two HDs and some memory.

POS. 😡

So I don't want to hear about Apples running hot. I know hot and brother, your Apple ain't hot! 😀
 
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