Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Some of us do care about more then just raw CPU clock speed.

The vast majority of Macbook users don't care about 3D performance. They probably don't even know what a video card/controller is. The Macbook is designed for basic tasks like internet usage, music/video, etc. It does all of those very well. My base model Macbook can decode 1080p video at full speed. Apple does not intend it to be used for 3D gaming, so there is really no reason for them to upgrade it. As long as the GMA950 supports OS X then it meets Apple's requirements.

In Australia, many shops don't even have Macbooks in stock because they're so much in demand. Why would Apple waste their money upgrading a component when the demand for the current product is already exceeding supply?
 
The vast majority of Macbook users don't care about 3D performance. They probably don't even know what a video card/controller is. The Macbook is designed for basic tasks like internet usage, music/video, etc. It does all of those very well. My base model Macbook can decode 1080p video at full speed. Apple does not intend it to be used for 3D gaming, so there is really no reason for them to upgrade it. As long as the GMA950 supports OS X then it meets Apple's requirements.

In Australia, many shops don't even have Macbooks in stock because they're so much in demand. Why would Apple waste their money upgrading a component when the demand for the current product is already exceeding supply?
So that means I really need to spend US$1,799 on a MacBook Pro when I just want a ever so slightly more capable MacBook.

GMA 950 from the Radeon in the iBook, ouch.

Wherever are you 13.3" MacBook Pro since it seems like we need one.
 
The vast majority of Macbook users don't care about 3D performance. They probably don't even know what a video card/controller is. The Macbook is designed for basic tasks like internet usage, music/video, etc. It does all of those very well. My base model Macbook can decode 1080p video at full speed. Apple does not intend it to be used for 3D gaming, so there is really no reason for them to upgrade it. As long as the GMA950 supports OS X then it meets Apple's requirements.

In Australia, many shops don't even have Macbooks in stock because they're so much in demand. Why would Apple waste their money upgrading a component when the demand for the current product is already exceeding supply?

Might be a problem if Intel decides (or has already decided) to stop producing the Napa (Calistoga) chipset.
 
The vast majority of Macbook users don't care about 3D performance. They probably don't even know what a video card/controller is. The Macbook is designed for basic tasks like internet usage, music/video, etc. It does all of those very well. My base model Macbook can decode 1080p video at full speed. Apple does not intend it to be used for 3D gaming, so there is really no reason for them to upgrade it. As long as the GMA950 supports OS X then it meets Apple's requirements.

In Australia, many shops don't even have Macbooks in stock because they're so much in demand. Why would Apple waste their money upgrading a component when the demand for the current product is already exceeding supply?

Apple would sell more laptops because it would stop annoying people who want a better graphics option, a better more future proof computer (yes that is important to people) and word of mouth would also be better. And it wouldn't cost Apple anything extra (unless they are simply trying to get rid of inventory).
Its an approach like this, 'we will arrogantly sell you hardware with less options which are quite pricey' which loses Apple many potential customers. There isn't this love/hate Apple relationship for no reason.

I too will not buy the Macbook if they don't give it SR and x3100. The OSX is great but not enough to make me buy old hardware for 2008.
 
a better more future proof computer

i think this is key here given the EOL on napa-based solutions. the MB is the last in the queue for SR (and the u/g gfx that goes with it) ahead of leopard's release, and in time for the holiday season sales. it all points to SR for MB for me. dunno if we'll see alu case, but that doesn't bother me...neither does a cpu speed bump TBH. :)
 
I will be buying a new Mac very soon. In fact, I would buy now if it weren't for Leopard coming out soon. I have never owned a Mac but looking at them in the stores and screen captures online, Mac OS 10.4 looks much better to me than Leopard. I am tempted to buy before Leopard comes out just so I can have Tiger.

On the other hand, if it is possible they are going to upgrade the Macbook with the release of Leopard, I am waiting. If they don't upgrade the Macbook, I may just buy the Macbook Pro.

I like the design and size of the Macbook, but I would like the video card in the Macbook Pro. I really don't play games, but you never know what will happen in the future. Mainly I want the Mac for iLife and to get away from Windows.
 
I will be buying a new Mac very soon. In fact, I would buy now if it weren't for Leopard coming out soon. I have never owned a Mac but looking at them in the stores and screen captures online, Mac OS 10.4 looks much better to me than Leopard. I am tempted to buy before Leopard comes out just so I can have Tiger.

On the other hand, if it is possible they are going to upgrade the Macbook with the release of Leopard, I am waiting. If they don't upgrade the Macbook, I may just buy the Macbook Pro.

I like the design and size of the Macbook, but I would like the video card in the Macbook Pro. I really don't play games, but you never know what will happen in the future. Mainly I want the Mac for iLife and to get away from Windows.

Just out of curiosity, what is it about Tiger that makes you want it more than Leopard? You mentioned it looks better to you - do you just mean in terms of visual appearance?

If so, I suspect you could probably use something like ShapeShifter to change the appearance of Leopard to more closely resemble Tiger.

-Zadillo
 
Yeah just the visuals. But again, I am really new to the Mac scene. I am watching some videos of Leopard on Apple.com and now see that I didn't have a clue what I was talking about, lol. Leopard has some really awesome features like spaces, etc.

Just waiting on Leopard to buy my new Mac!
 
Longer they leave it the more people will buy the Dell XPS M1330... (like my mate who i've told to wait until the end of this month)

http://www.trustedreviews.com/notebooks/review/2007/10/11/Dell-XPS-M1330/p1
I agree. Apple definitely needs to compete it's MacBook against the XPS M1330. Both are around the same size and around the price.

http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=3787&review=XPS+M1330

http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=3898
 
Apple would sell more laptops because it would stop annoying people who want a better graphics option, a better more future proof computer (yes that is important to people) and word of mouth would also be better. And it wouldn't cost Apple anything extra (unless they are simply trying to get rid of inventory).
Its an approach like this, 'we will arrogantly sell you hardware with less options which are quite pricey' which loses Apple many potential customers. There isn't this love/hate Apple relationship for no reason.

I too will not buy the Macbook if they don't give it SR and x3100. The OSX is great but not enough to make me buy old hardware for 2008.

Important to you maybe.. and thats totally understandable, but I know 6 people who own Macs and none of them know, or could care less what video card they have. All they know and care about is that they dont have to worry about viruses and whatnot, and that they also can "just use it". They dont have to do the techy admin stuff like they did on a windows machine.

I'll concede that I wish for a more powerful gpu, but when I game, I use my consoles. I think that most mac users just want a computer that works and like the several that I know, dont care about gpu, ram (well maybe), and all the other tech specs.
 
I Won't Drop My G4 PB Until I See Better 17" MBP HD Specs

in that case, u shoulda kept yer old powerbook G4 1.25"GHz...:p
I still have the 1.25GHz G4 and will keep hanging on to it until the 17" MBP HD goes to 2.8GHz 45nm C2D with LED screen.

But when the MB goes SR, I may go that way instead. Will depend on if it supports rotation on external screen or not.
 
I'm trying to

Decide between impulse purchase of a MBP with Leopard or a wait to see what the new Macbooks are like, but that could take a while.
The only reason I was set on a macbook pro was because of how out of date the macbook range was, but now...
It's hard!
 
Decide between impulse purchase of a MBP with Leopard or a wait to see what the new Macbooks are like, but that could take a while.
The only reason I was set on a macbook pro was because of how out of date the macbook range was, but now...
It's hard!

I'm in the same boat. I want a new MBP to come out with Leopard before I purchase, but it's all clouded now. Dunno what's gonna happen.
 
Important to you maybe.. and thats totally understandable, but I know 6 people who own Macs and none of them know, or could care less what video card they have. All they know and care about is that they dont have to worry about viruses and whatnot, and that they also can "just use it". They dont have to do the techy admin stuff like they did on a windows machine.

Well, maybe it depends on whom you know? These people you know don't sound very knowledgeable about computers in general. You're also talking about EXISTING Mac users and we're talking about POTENTIAL Mac users. Apple already sold these 6 people a computer based on total ignorance of what they were buying (beyond it's not likely to get a virus and apparently doesn't need "techy admin stuff" (whatever that means) so why would they care about what a new Mac might have? Why would they ever care about buying a new Mac again for that matter? (Cuz it got like slow and stuff with newer software?)

I'll concede that I wish for a more powerful gpu, but when I game, I use my consoles. I think that most mac users just want a computer that works and like the several that I know, dont care about gpu, ram (well maybe), and all the other tech specs.

I have very specific needs. I create virtual pinball games under Windows (cannot move that to OSX due to the software I'm using so I need XP one way or the other plus to run my old software occasionally). I also want to play SOME (even if not very often) newer games on occasion. That means Intel GMA 950 doesn't cut it. It doesn't mean I need a $2000+ MBP (that price range is almost unheard of on the PC these days except bleeding edge gaming systems, which the MBP and MacPro are NOT) and I regularly talk to people at work who say they like the looks of the Mac and what they hear about it, but they're "so darn expensive". I point out there are some cheaper models available and they ask about what they get for that price and when I say Intel GMA 950 integrated graphics on the MacBook and MacMini, they laugh at me. "Who'd want THAT? So you're telling me Apple is basically FORCING a real user to buy their $2k+ lines if they want to do something a $700 PC can do with no problems?" What am I going to respond with? You don't NEED to play games? You don't need to do any 3D stuff? You don't need anything MODERN?

What it comes down to is if OSX is going to be taken seriously as a cutting edge OS, they need MODERN hardware. Apple seems to go to great extremes to keep their CPUs current, but what doesn't make any sense is how they don't seem to care one bit about their GPUs and yet they STILL use it as the only REAL difference (other than screen size) between a Macbook and a Macbook Pro. If MOST Mac users really do not care about GPUs in the first place, why use it like that to force people to go to the model that costs twice as much?

Gaming is not a 'Pro' feature, so why force users to buy 'Pro' equipment just to play a modern CURRENT YEAR game? The Santa Rosa graphics are not cutting edge. They do NOT compete with the MBP, but they DO make the difference between being able to play a 3D game PERIOD in many cases or not. IMO, this creates RESENTMENT. Apple may WANT me to buy a new laptop every single year, but I don't want to do it and OSX fan or not, I will go PC only if Apple will not meet me at least halfway. Why should I start investing in OSX only commercial software if I have to worry whether my next computer will even be a Mac because of them playing games like this with hardware to force me to overspend? I can get TWO capable PCs for the price of one Mac simply because they are trying to force me to buy the MBP instead of the MB over ONE feature (graphics). That feature doesn't even mean much to a non-gamer (who doesn't need fast 3D performance).

It just seems like Apple needs to decide whom they're marketing to and for what reasons. Screen size should not determine "Pro" status, IMO. Screen size = portability factor in my book. Graphics card = gaming performance. CPU/Memory/Ports = pro features (fast/big/firewire 800, etc.). This is because CPU speed is not the limiting factor with gaming these days. GPU is almost everything.
 
This might be irrevelant, but i've been comparing my Macbook's GMA950 versus my Dell with 8400m GS 128mb DDR3 using the game World of Warcraft. I've been booting my Macbook into WindowsXP to run WoW and in some cases the game runs better on the Macbook than my Dell does under Vista64.. Both are identical in where I have the graphics settings.. the Macbook's GMA950 is a lot more consistent and much more responsive than my Dell machine, despite the FPS being lower.. it's almost more enjoyable..

I'm posting this to say that I think the GMA950 is no slouch.. i'm continually impressed that it can handle itself so well.. All performance goes to crap on the GMA950 when you have terrain distance on max.. so I just leave it all the way down, or +1.. but higher than that it's not worth it.. it can handle all other graphic effects on maximum without hurting performance.

Even the WoW with terrain distance on lowest setting, the FPS are within 5 fps of each other in most situations between the both laptops.. and no, I do not have a driver problem on my Dell.. it's fine..

Don't get me wrong, i'd love to see the X3100 atleast make it to the next Macbook.. it's due for an update for sure.

Jay
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.