The MacBook is out

[flacochala]

Thats a nice point of view.. is this intel GMA a graphic card that will be supported by mac os x´s "core image"???.... Its a brand new machine, i hope that they will provide support for core image with this graphic card... Another thing to notice, is that, leopard its not so far, and undoublty it will require more processing graphic power than tiger... and my ibook (radeon 9200) does not do some transicions in tiger, so, will this graphic card cripple my leopard experience?

 

[Qion]

Integrated graphics:

I absolutely hate the fact that Apple uses the Intel graphic chips - when the switch to Intel was announced I prayed - "Please don't be be cheap and use the Intel integrated graphics line." I believe I am wrong - or someone above hates me... I am sure you can do lots of things with the Macbook - but honestly any demanding game after 2002 - 2003 is out of question. The worst thing is the lack of dedicated video RAM. So, you have to sacrifice precious RAM for video functions - I believe its barely enough for accelerated core video/graphic (two reasons why it isn't advertised on the Macbook HW page).

Ah I was so excited when my homepage told me that this MacBook is finally out. And then... that. It kills the deal for me. Unless I hear reports of this machine running Doom 3 decently (not that I play Doom 3), I'm holding off.

I know that Apple has to separate Pro from, er, not-pro, but that just ruins it for a lot of creative professionals on a budget.

 

[HateEternal]

Unless I hear reports of this machine running Doom 3 decently (not that I play Doom 3), I'm holding off.

Hah. Good luck! I tried, just for giggles to run Half-life 2 on my laptop. Sure it doesn't have the same processor performance but the graphics is about the same. I got around two FPS on extemely low settings. Doom 3 is more graphically demanding than HL2.

 

[Giaguara]

But the entry-level version will do just fine for me, anyway. This is what I've been basically waiting for ever since I sold my last 12" iBook. I _need_ the resolution of my 15" PB, and the new MacBook (almost, 54 vertical pixels missing...) has it - in a lighter package. I *HOPE* the keyboard works. I loved Apple's notebook keyboards forever, so I truly hope they didn't f*** up this one. They _state_ that tapping a key needs a little more power with this one, and I fear that could be a deal-breaker for me. At 150+ keys/minute, any slowdown can be veeeeery annoying for a writer.

So you are going to get one even though you say you need 54 more pixels width on it?

My husband by the way bought one today for me .. he says the keyboard is nice.

Can't wait to take the Macbook apart to stick in a 120 or 160 GB hard drive instead.

 

[nixgeek]

How wouild this ruin it for creative professionals on a budget? Considering they are "creative professionals" I think that the low end MacBook Pro is nicely priced, and it includes the discrete graphics. The MacBook isn't targeted for professionals. It's meant for the rest of us who need a decent Mac notebook at a good price.

The Intel GMA950 does in fact support CoreImage so that will be an improvement. Sure, it's not the x1600 video chipset but it can hold its own compared to the 9200 video chipset found in the iBook.

Consider that some PC laptops out there have the same thing and don't match up to what the MacBook offers.

 

[flacochala]

hey nixgeek's, i was trying to find at http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/coreimage/ if the gma950 was supported by coreimage... but i didnt find it... were did you read or hear that intel graphic cards are supported by coreimage??.. that could be good news for me... (im trying to convince myself that the macbook is the mac for me)

 

[ra3ndy]

hey nixgeek's, i was trying to find at http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/coreimage/ if the gma950 was supported by coreimage... but i didnt find it... were did you read or hear that intel graphic cards are supported by coreimage??.. that could be good news for me... (im trying to convince myself that the macbook is the mac for me)

Go here and scroll down to "Supported Graphics Cards" (section 4.1). The GMA950 is listed.

 

[fryke]

Also, the Mac mini has been out a while, so there _is_ information on how well the integrated graphics stuff performs in Mac OS X and what it supports. I don't see how this is a deal-breaker. I mean, yeah: For gamers. But then the iBook/MacBook *never* was for you. It never was a top of the line gaming computer ever. When stuck at G3/G4 processors, it didn't even have the raw processing power gamers craved, and their graphics cards were _always_ at the low end. Sure, I agree that they _could_ have used one of the cheaper ATi or nVidia cards, but those would not have been enough for serious gaming (*cough*), either. Not for more than a month or two, anyway...

Giaguara: Vertical pixels are for height, not width.

About the use of such a 'book by a professional: I consider myself one in more than one way... I was waiting for this as my favourite typewriter on-the-go - and this task it'll serve well (if the keyboard's okay, that is, I wonder...).

I'm also a graphics pro - and that's what I need the resolution for. 1024*768 didn't really cut it, and I like to work also when I'm on the road, not just at home where I have a larger external display. For DTP you don't really need the 3D graphics power. Not at all, in fact 8 MB VRAM would be perfectly okay even today (although Mac OS X would crawl to a halt at some point...). See: It can drive a 23" Cinema Display just fine at 1920*1080, so that's fine. It probably won't play HD movies at 1080p without stuttering, but I don't intend to do that on it, anyway, since the video projector I connect it do only does 800*600, and the next one I'll buy will do 1024*768, so even _then_ I won't need the graphics card a Doom 3 player needs. Seriously: Consider playing games on an Xbox or PS2/PS3 and use your _computer_ for work and other entertainment... I think people who expect this MacBook to be "the gamer's choice" are simply mistaken at the very beginning...

 

[Mikuro]

As with the Mac Mini, the price went up a bit. Bummer.

I don't agree with Apple's recent philosophy AT ALL. Does everyone need an iSight? Does everyone need Bluetooth? Does everyone need Airport Extreme? NO, NO, NO! That's great for the iMac, which is now certifiably a luxury machine, but now the consumer MacBook, too? And the Mini, for that matter (minus the iSight).

They crammed both the Mini and the MacBook full of unnecessary features, and bumped up the prices. There's a problem here. Get back on track, Apple!

It's a nice update, though, no doubt about that, and for what you get, the price is right. I'm surprised to see the Core Duo all across the board. That's nice, although if it would mean cutting the price by a significant amount, a new Solo low-end would be a nice addition, since most users will get only minimal benefit from a second core.

I wish they didn't use a "glossy" screen, though. That's enough to make me not even consider the MacBook.

 

[Ifrit]

But then the iBook/MacBook *never* was for you. It never was a top of the line gaming computer ever.

Of course I know that - I am just disappointed that a fine machine is crippeled in the video department. Personally I wouldn't miss the isight if Apple decided "to bump" the GPU instead.
There are some application which benefit from a decent GPU - 3D modeling applications for example, or the next version of OSX which (most likley) depends even more on the power of the graphic HW. Remember the original mac mini G4? Introduced 1 - 2 months before Tiger, but it had only 32MB video RAM onboard - this meant "sorry, no accelerated core image/video for you".

Fortunally this doesn't apply to the the current OSX features - macbook features situation - otherwise the macbook wouldn't run Frontrow which is a core image application. But this might change in the next version of OSX - "sorry, no accelerated vector graphics + effects for you - GPU is to weak"

BTW, buying a laptop for gaming purposes only is absolutly nonesense. In 1/2 - 3/4 year you are stuck with an outdated machine which isn't able to run the latest games.

Personally I used my G3 ibook for lots of things - even for accomplishing tasks which were in the realm of the pro machines: video editing, writing and surfing the net (of course), Photoshop, recording audio, coding small programs, rencode movie files and so on. If you are stuck with a low end machine you learn how to make the most out of it. Unfortunally the logic board broke otherwise I would be still using it. The Macbook seems to be a great replacement, because my needs didn't change that much over the 4 years I had the ibook G3 700Mhz.

 

[Veljo]

I'm relatively happy with the new MacBook. Things I'm not happy with are the colour — I think black computers are absolutely ugly, and as Fryke said, the remote and power cords should've been made black to match. My other gripe is the RAM — 2 x 256MB DIMMs? Come on, that's about as cheap as you can get. When someone does a memory upgrade they're essentially left with one or two useless DIMMs that they then have to sell. 1 x 512MB would've been a far better option.

EDIT: Here's an example of the glossy screens:

 

[hawki18]

I can't believe that they put in sharded graphics and still want that much money. I was hoping it would have aleast a 64mb video card half of the mac pro. That would be make a big differance when doing something this graphic intensive.

 

[Ifrit]

I can't believe that they put in sharded graphics and still want that much money. I was hoping it would have aleast a 64mb video card half of the mac pro. That would be make a big differance when doing something this graphic intensive.

This is the same thing I thought - "If they update the pro line to the next version, maybe the equivalent to the ibook will get the same graphic card specs which was present in the latest Powerbook models."

Fortunally they didn't cut features. I remember being disappointed with the low spec ibook model option back in (the beginning of) 2003.

- no DVD ROM drive - even if it was standard in most of the x86 notebooks produced in 2003
- only 20GB HD space - 5-8 GB were already used by the OS + iLife
- only 128MB RAM

Hopefully the new model isn't a nightmare to take appart - not that I recommend tinkering with machines which are still under warranty. I have seen 700$ notebooks which were easier to upgrade than the iBook.

 

[fryke]

As far as can be seen from first reports, it's very easy to upgrade RAM and replace the harddrive. Anything else: No. But then again, you don't _really_ want to mess with the tightly fit innards of a 'Book. I remember trying to fit a new harddrive into my TiBook 500 back then. They had added some rubber fitting to their drive, which of course you could *not* easily remove and put on your new drive, which left me with the choice of using something else to make it not move around inside the TiBook all the time or use the smaller drive. I went for the first option. (me evil...)

What I'm thinking about... They basically _could_ offer a version of the MacBook 13.3" with a better graphics option for a couple more dollars and call it "Pro", too. After all, the MacBook also replaces the 12" PowerBook G4, which was considered "Pro". Then again, that one also always lacked in "Pro" features, so maybe it's simply not what Apple wants. Apple wants you to move to the 15" model instead if you need more oomph. Same as when the last round of PB G4s was new.

 

[karavite]

All in all, this line is something I could see a lot of people being happy with for the price. Too bad the lowest model didn't break below the $1000 limit - that would have been something.

Dumb question please - the one thing that has always confused me about this level Book is hooking them up to a projector (for presentations). It has been some time, but will using USB for this work well? Or which port would you use?

 

[Ifrit]

Dumb question please - the one thing that has always confused me about this level Book is hooking them up to a projector (for presentations). It has been some time, but will using USB for this work well? Or which port would you use?

You use the Mini - DVI port for that purpose (almost has the shape of an usb port - maybe thats the reason for you confusion). Then you plug an adaptor in it which has a DVI or VGA out. I am sure that at least one adaptor is already included.

Something I want to know - is the mini - DVI/VGA out of the iBook the same thing as the mini - DVI/VGA of the Mac Book pro?

As far as can be seen from first reports, it's very easy to upgrade RAM and replace the harddrive.

Hard drive is the only thing besides RAM which I would consider upgrating. Otherwise I had to desolder the GPU chip or something

 

[chadwick]

I was at the SF Apple store yesterday when they were setting them up for display and got to play with them a little bit. I was somewhat underwhelmed.

The display is bright, but like others have said before, the mirror effect just gives you nasty glare all the time.

The key feel, etc. was nice, better than the old G4 iBook but not much different.

Weight size it was hard to distinguish it from a 15" MacBook Pro, so other than the price difference I'd be hard pressed to actually buy one over the 15" Pro. It's just not small enough to really feel like a much better highly portable alternative to the Pro models.

It was properly quick, at least.

 

[fryke]

Don't underestimate size considerations. It might not _seem_ much smaller (and I'd actually love a 11 or 12 " widescreen model, but we know it's not coming anytime soon, so...), but if you want to put it in a smaller bag, it can be enough of a difference. Also if you have lots of stuff to carry around etc. Weight difference is about 500g, which can be all the difference between an aching shoulder and a smile on your face when you get home at the end of the day.

 

[RGrphc2]

As with the Mac Mini, the price went up a bit. Bummer.

/QUOTE]

A major reason for these price increases is because of the price of the Core Duo chips. These chips are brand new and a lot more money than the G4 chips's were.
These prices are for a single chip, not bulk

T2600 2.16GHz 667 2MB $637
T2500 2GHz 667 2MB $423
T2400 1.83GHz 667 2MB $294
T2300 1.66GHz 667 2MB $240
T2300E 1.66GHz 667 2MB $209
T1400 1.83GHz Solo 667 2MB $209
T1300 1.66GHz Solo 667 2MB $209


there will be a price drop towards the end of the month so its just a matter of time before the Macbook is less than $1000 again

remember the Mac Mini G4 Rev B. added a lot (bluetooth/airport/bigger HD)
along with the Final iBook G4 Rev. added Bluetooth/Airport/bigger hd for $999)

 

[Lt Major Burns]

wow. for anyone who's ever replaced a hard drive in a i/powerbook in the last 5 years:

http://www.macworld.com/weblogs/macword/2006/05/macbookvideo/index.php