×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

MacBook Pros Upgraded and Shipped

CmdrTaco posted more than 8 years ago | from the still-waiting-for-wow-benchmarks dept.

467

Moby Cock writes "Apple Insider is reporting that Apple has started shipping the new MacBook Pro with an upgrade to the CPU clock speed. The two models now sport 1.83 GHz and 2.0 GHz Core Duos (up from 1.67 GHz and 1.83 GHz). A 2.16 GHz upgrade is also available. The price point remains the same." Dear Apple: Slashdot needs to review 5 of these indefinitely. Thank you XOXO ;) Seriously, i'm waiting for someone to give good benchmarks on these- especially testing for Warcraft. Now that it has a new Universal Binary I can't wait to see how it holds up against a modern windows machine.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

467 comments

Great! (5, Funny)

FunctionalMethod (751923) | more than 8 years ago | (#14715907)

So that means it is 6 times faster right? RIGHT?

Happy with Windows machines (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14716034)

Although it's unpopular to say on here. I'm happy with my Windows machines, they're cheaper and came with just the specs I want. And all my software just works. I'm not trolling .. but quite frankly Windows XP with Service Pack 2 works fine FOR ME. I make ActiveX optional and of coure I run a firewall (just like Mac OS does by defult too)... I have never had a problem. Windows XP, for me, simply has not had a reboot worthy crash.

So my question is, why should I switch?

Re:Happy with Windows machines (5, Insightful)

Golias (176380) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716153)

So my question is, why should I switch?

My question is, why should we care?

If you're actually happy with your Windows box, good for you. Why even post in this thread?

1st? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14715910)

what the thingy says

Re:1st? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14715973)

no, I lose :(

MacBook (-1, Offtopic)

backslashdot (95548) | more than 8 years ago | (#14715914)

When Mac OS X unbundles Safari, and opens the hardware I'll be using it. And no, I'm not happy with Windows.

Re:MacBook (1)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 8 years ago | (#14715958)

I imagine you'll be waiting quite a while. Then again, who knows. Maybe you won't...

And to be a pedantic prick, Apple is the company, not Mac OS X. The company is the one that would open the hardware and unbundle Safari (which isn't tied into the OS in nearly the same way as IE/Win).

Re:MacBook (2, Insightful)

illtron (722358) | more than 8 years ago | (#14715978)

Why unbundle Safari? Are you saying they shouldn't ship it with their machines and the OS? Uhhhhhh, why? It's not tied into the OS in any way like IE on Windows, and you're free to use Firefox, Camino, Opera or any other browser.

Re:MacBook (1)

iriefrank (41550) | more than 8 years ago | (#14715989)

I'm sorry to break this to you, but Windows bundles a browser too.

The open hardware issue is a more valid point, but why not move from one bundled-browser OS to another because the new OS has a bundled browser??

Silly.

Re:MacBook (2, Informative)

jandrese (485) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716061)

You could just trash Safari and install Firefox (or leave Safari there and install Firefox). It's not like the browser is integrated into the OS or anything.

Re:MacBook (3, Insightful)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716064)

Just because the browser comes pre-installed doesn't mean that it's bundled quite the way IE is. You can still remove it, and install any other browser you want. Most Linux distros by default will install a browser too. Try installing KDE without Konquerer. I'm pretty sure it isn't possible.

Re:MacBook (1)

b17bmbr (608864) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716189)

safari is really a front end to WebKit which is just Konqueror without all the fancy buttons. WebKit is nice as you can integrate a browser into any app with 1 line of code. So it's like IE in that it's a component (Framework), but unlike it in that it isn't part of the fundamental OS. WebKit does one thing only and it is secure.

Re:MacBook (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14716193)

I installed KDE without Koqueror last weekend.

You can do it with Gentoo using the KDE-Split Ebuilds. Of course since Konquerer is also a decent KDE file manager, my next step was to emerge Konqueror.

Re:MacBook (1)

Daltorak (122403) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716257)

That's a common misconception. Sure, "Safari" can be easily removed, just like "Internet Explorer" can, but the real meat of the rendering and parsing work is done by WebKit [opendarwin.org], which is also used for Dashboard, Mail, and a number of third-party applications (notably Adium, SubEthaEdit, Colloquy, Xcode and NetNewsWire)... in this sense it's EXACTLY like Windows' MSHTML and MSXML, in that it is a required, integrated component of the operating system.

Re:MacBook (2, Insightful)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716295)

But my point still stands. How many parts of KDE become unusable once you remove Konquerer? The browser/ HTML rendering engine is an important part of any modern Desktop. The real question is, how deep does the browser tie into the actual OS/Kernel? If the browser is just a component that lets you render HTML/CSS/JS, then it's probably doing just what a browser is supposed to do. Certain linux packages require certain desktop libraries (KDE,Gnome) to be installed in order to function. IE is a different beast altogether because it goes much deeper than the application level, right into the OS level causing lots of security problems.

LOL at the hippy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14716073)

You included a few phrases that get the slashbots dribbling into their rank, long unwashed y-fronts, but you're karma whoring still failed...miserably!

Re:MacBook (1)

_Pablo (126574) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716220)

This is the internet age and I definitely want a browser with my OS in the same way as I wanted a text editor with my OS years ago, but that's not to suggest I want that browser to be surgically inserted into the guts of my OS.

Dual boot (1)

JFlex (763276) | more than 8 years ago | (#14715918)

I'm still waiting for a full review / writeup of how to dual-boot these with OS X and Windows (yeah yeah, I know, Windows...) if at all possible.

Re:Dual boot (4, Insightful)

_Pablo (126574) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716126)

Well Windows Vista setup boots, but there is no graphics driver for the UGA BIOS so you don't see anything - but remember the keypresses to exit Vista setup and Robert is your mothers brother the computer reboots.

So it seems the like "Running Windows natively" problem has become one of getting Windows drivers for the Mac hardware which given most of it is now Intel standard stuff means we are really waiting for Apple or Microsoft (or perhaps ATI) to release that driver or for someone to hack the Windows driver to work with the Mac BIOSed X1600s.

That is an exceedingly bad idea. (5, Insightful)

jcr (53032) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716143)

Wait for VPC or VMWare. Letting Windows boot your hardware is just begging for a world of pain.

-jcr

Re:That is an exceedingly bad idea. (1)

FuturePastNow (836765) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716232)

No. VPC is fine for running office apps, but for me, the whole point of putting Windows on one of these computers is for games. The virtual solutions all emulate 2-d video cards; if I've got a Radeon x1600, I'm damn well going to use it.

Re:That is an exceedingly bad idea. (1)

jcr (53032) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716273)

YMMV, but I wouldn't take the risk of letting Windows malware trash my Mac.

-jcr

Re:Dual boot (1)

Ritz_Just_Ritz (883997) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716293)

I'm also waiting for dual boot. I want the hardware simply because I like the way Apple designs their hardware. It's relatively light, sturdy, the internals are pretty full-featured for a small form factor laptop, and it's easy on the eyes. Given the cost is about the same as a duo powered Vaio, you're not really paying a huge "Apple tax" if you decide you don't want to run OSX and want to run Windows or Linux instead. I would definitely consider buying one, but not if it can only run OSX.

Cheers,

Still Rev 0. (2, Insightful)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 8 years ago | (#14715919)

It is still rev 0. Ill personally wait for Apple and Intel to get the major kinks out of their perspective products. Mabey next year. But still I am glad the CPU speed it is shipping is a little higher then advertised becaues other laptops were shipping now with the faster chip.

Re:Still Rev 0. (1)

Strawser (22927) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716055)

Same here. I just got one of the older G5 Powerbooks a few months ago (indefinate loaner from work), and it'll do just fine until later revisions of the software. I'm looking forward to replacing my Windows desktop with a PowerMac or iMac, though. (Windows + cygwin + Apache + WarFTP did what I needed, but OS X does it much, much better).

Re:Still Rev 0. (1)

timbck2 (233967) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716155)

Of course you meant you got a G4 Powerbook from work; Apple has never shipped any G5 Powerbooks (that being one of the reasons for the switch to the Intel CPUs).

Re:Still Rev 0. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14716068)

Mabey you should learn to spell. Then your opinion might count for something...

Re:Still Rev 0... but Intel did the internals (2, Insightful)

Pao|o (92817) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716089)

If it was a PowerPC-based Mac with internals done by PowerPC-partner then I'd wait. Seeming this is designed by Intel with way way more in debt experience making personal computers I wouldnt worry as much. The external casing is still basically a tried & tested Apple Albook so I wouldnt worry too much.

If you're a pro user with a need for native Adobe & Macromedia apps then I'd wait for the universal binaries that are expected late this year or 2008. By that time OS X 10.5 Leopard is expected to be out.

So many upgrades, so little time. (5, Funny)

Mattness (636060) | more than 8 years ago | (#14715935)

I was just warming up to the idea of a 1.8 this 2.16 Ghz is gonna take some getting used to. Can I handle that much speed?

Re:So many upgrades, so little time. (2, Insightful)

DenDave (700621) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716048)

Move to Europe, the local sites have (at time of writing) not upgraded the MacBook....

WoW (5, Interesting)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 8 years ago | (#14715938)

Ahhh. WoW - the single most important universal binary released so far. I hope Blizzard listens to their customers and releases universal binaries of thier existing OS X compatible games (WC3, SC, Diablo2). With regards to the story, cool that Apple bumped everyone up a notch on the speed pole for free.

Re:WoW (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14715999)

I wouldn't hold your breath. Blizzard has already said (can't find the link) basically that you can use Rosetta for all their other OS X games. If you want to install Starcraft or Diablo 2, they tell you to download the OS X installer.

They've implied that there will be no fat binaries for their existing games other than WOW.

I'm not too upset, and I play a Warcraft 3 custom map almost daily. I really haven't noticed any speed issues, but it does crash sometimes.

Re:WoW (1)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716066)

Actually, since you seem to have some experience with this, how well does Warcraft 3 play on the Intel Macs? You said you haven't had any speed problems. Is that with all the graphics settings turned up, too?

Re:WoW (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14716169)

It plays well with everything turned on. I have the 20" iMac. It doesn't load the map as snappy as everyone else, but once you are in the game it's fine.

Like I said though, I've been playing the DOTA custom map on it for several weeks daily - it crashed once during loading yesterday and crashed a couple of times as I connected to battle.net.

The rare crashes haven't annoyed me yet - I do wish the maps loaded quicker though. Gameplay as good as it was on my powerbook.

Re:WoW (1)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716200)

Cool. Thanks for your answer. I'm sure the new machines have no problems running Starcraft and Diablo2. Hopefully I'll have one soon to find out for myself.

Re:WoW (1)

chrysrobyn (106763) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716229)

You play WC3 / DOTA on OSX. Do you ever have trouble quitting WC3? Both OSX machines I've used, when I'm in full screen mode, the program will hang either upon apple-Q or quitting through the menus. When I use either method under window mode I have a 50% chance of a proper quit. The program dies properly when "force quit".

Re:WoW (1)

jandrese (485) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716043)

As if your 2 Ghz machine is going to be hard pressed to play Starcraft or Diablo anyway. I'd wager a bet that even through Rosetta your machine will have more than enough power to play those games. WC3 might strain it a bit, but I'll probably still be playable too.

Re:WoW (1)

softspokenrevolution (644206) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716291)

No, it's not a free bump up the speed pole. The cost of a faster processor has already been built into the price of the machines, it's just like that bag of M&Ms that says you're getting 35% more for free, it's just a marketing gimick.

OS is not everything (-1, Troll)

Mopatop (690958) | more than 8 years ago | (#14715940)

Now that it has a new Universal Binary I can't wait to see how it holds up against a modern windows machine.

I can answer that: Poorly. A modern Windows machine will always outperform a MacBook in games. More hardware, more options. Especially if you talk price-matching, we know MacBooks aren't exactly cheap.

Re:OS is not everything (1)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 8 years ago | (#14715992)

I believe Taco was referring to comparing it to a comparably equipped Windows laptop. In which case, the prices are fairly similar. I suspect performance will be pretty similar, too.

Re:OS is not everything (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14716003)

More hardware, more options. Especially if you talk price-matching, we know MacBooks aren't exactly cheap.

Yeah, because I have so many options for video when spec'ing out my Dell laptop.

Oh, wait, you wanted to compare a laptop to your gaming machine with it's $500 video card?

Sure. That makes sense.

Re:OS is not everything (1)

diegocgteleline.es (653730) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716051)

More hardware, more options. Especially if you talk price-matching, we know MacBooks aren't exactly cheap.

Yeah, that's why Dell is near backrupt. x86 home-made computers are definitively taking the market.

MOD PARENT UP! (-1, Flamebait)

backslashdot (95548) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716078)

Why did this get marked troll?? What's he's saying is true .. people are just blind to reality when it come to Apple. It' a sorry state. Show me specs of any Mac OS X machine outperforming the top Windows game. It's not jut performance it's low cost customiation option too that Windows leads in. In my opinion, Apple's snobbish attitude to third parties and refusal to open up their BIOS has led to these problems.

Re:MOD PARENT UP! (3, Informative)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716184)

Why did this get marked troll?? What's he's saying is true .

Because he intentionally missed the point the previous poster was making. This will allow real-world benchmarking of OS+application with hardware and software that is similar enough to expose the bottlenecks.

people are just blind to reality when it come to Apple.

Yes, everyone but you is ignorant and misinformed.

Show me specs of any Mac OS X machine outperforming the top Windows game.

For some reason not many people try to benchmark a operating system plus a machine against a game. I think it is because they are not even close to being the same thing.

It's not jut performance it's low cost customiation option too that Windows leads in.

Performance varies based upon a given task, hardware, and software. The point is we can soon actually benchmark a given task with the same (or very similar) hardware, thus removing a variable. Honestly no one really knows if "Windows is faster" because until now we have not had a way to test it. Of course everyone with the ability to reason knows the result will be that Windows is better at some things and OS X is better at some things.

In my opinion, Apple's snobbish attitude to third parties and refusal to open up their BIOS has led to these problems.

Yeah, Apple really should open up OpenFirmware which is what they've been using instead of BIOS for the last decade. They are just now moving to EFI, which is another open standard. You obviously have no idea what you are talking about.

Re:MOD PARENT UP! (1)

Golias (176380) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716259)

It's not jut performance it's low cost customiation option too that Windows leads in.

Umm... You do know we are discussing LAPTOPS here, right?

If you're doing a lot of customizations to upgrade the video performance, etc., of your windows laptop, then you are far better with a soldering gun than I.

Re:MOD PARENT UP! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14716260)

It's not their BIOS they won't open up. It's EFI (Extensible Firmware Interface), which was made by Intel; XP just doesn't support EFI, that'll be a 'new' feature of Vista's. Apple switched to EFI with the Intel Macs. Before, Apple was using OpenFirmware.

So please, get a life, an idea of what you're talking about, and a third-grade education before you touch your keyboard again.

Re:OS is not everything (5, Insightful)

Bazzalisk (869812) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716149)

Yes we know that macbooks aren't exactly cheap ... and nor are gaming capable PC laptops -- they come out quite comparable pricewise. You certainly can't buy a PC laptop with all of the features of the MacBook for much less than the MacBook costs.

Re:OS is not everything (1)

hattig (47930) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716195)

When it comes to 3D games, the OS will be backseat to the hardware.

In this laptop's case, it is an ATI X1600 family graphics processor.

That's pretty good, but it isn't a mobile variant of an nVidia 7800. Of course, these don't come in cheap laptops either.

Apart from that you will have Apple's slightly suboptimal OpenGL implementation, and possibly a layer of DirectX->OpenGL translation depending on how the game was ported.

Certainly this MacBook Pro will outperform the majority of PC laptops in games simply because the majority of PC laptops utilise integrated graphics - sometimes even at the $2000 pricepoint. However it will probably lose to any gamer or extreme performance PC laptops. Then again, they aren't $999 either.

Still Waiting... (0)

notext (461158) | more than 8 years ago | (#14715946)

Slap one in a 17" and I'm sold. I was hoping that would be the first upgrade they made.

Hotcakes (2, Interesting)

Peregr1n (904456) | more than 8 years ago | (#14715948)

It's a shame they haven't been available to review yet, but to be fair, Apple aren't really missing anything. They will sell like hotcakes to start with, even if they turn out to be bricks with LEDs strapped on.

Shh... That's a secret. (4, Funny)

DaedalusLogic (449896) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716173)

even if they turn out to be bricks with LEDs strapped on.

They've been working on the iBrick for years. I heard it makes the satisfying Apple boot sound when you throw it through a window.

what about preorders? (2, Interesting)

invader_allan (583758) | more than 8 years ago | (#14715952)

What happened to the people who preordered a 1.66GHz for the same price as the 1.83 when they hard launched? Did they get the prototype they ordered or the real deal? Note to self: never preorder new tech!

Re:what about preorders? (5, Informative)

mccalli (323026) | more than 8 years ago | (#14715994)

ppened to the people who preordered a 1.66GHz for the same price as the 1.83 when they hard launched? Did they get the prototype they ordered or the real deal? Note to self: never preorder new tech!

macrumor.com says [macrumors.com] that they're getting the upgraded model.

Cheers,
Ian

Re:what about preorders? (2, Informative)

isa-kuruption (317695) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716141)

I just called Apple and confirmed that all 1.67 orders will be upgraded to 1.83 and all 1.83 orders will be upgraded to 2.0. You should receive an email about the changes with any revised shipping date within the next day or two.

I had the same question, I had ordered the 1.83ghz and didn't want to get screwed by this little change in plans.

What about iMacs? (0)

makers78 (614325) | more than 8 years ago | (#14715968)

I assume the iMac will be getting a similar speed bump? Kinda silly have laptops available with faster procs than the desktops.

Re:What about iMacs? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14716037)

Not if they're pro laptops vs consumer desktops

Re:What about iMacs? (1)

Incongruity (70416) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716091)

I assume the iMac will be getting a similar speed bump? Kinda silly have laptops available with faster procs than the desktops.

Silly? Not at all -- the iMac is a consumer targeted desktop, not their pro-line, whereas the PowerB...err MacBook is their pro-line laptop. Moreover, given their respective price points there better be a speed advantage for the significantly more expensive laptops.

'Shipping' versus 'Delivery' (3, Funny)

Ford Prefect (8777) | more than 8 years ago | (#14715969)

Had another quick look at my order (I'm in the UK).

MBPRO 15/1.67 CTO. Estimated shipping date: Feb 15, 2006.

Estimated delivery date: Feb 22, 2006.

Still, if it comes with a faster processor, I won't be too disappointed - but with it being leading-edge hardware, it'll probably explode in my lap and permanently neuter me...

Re:'Shipping' versus 'Delivery' (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14716023)

As a slashdot registered user, your necessity, and indeed likelihood, for the procreation of the species was already reduced considerably.

I can't wait until you guys realize (5, Interesting)

cyberbian (897119) | more than 8 years ago | (#14715983)

That there's a TPM chip installed shipping enabled, with no end-user controls to verify the trust settings match the security context in which it's installed. Like my maxed out iMac Core Duo... Privacy Commissioner in T-10 days... still no response from Apple Privacy... Check the documentation http://www.trustedcomputinggroup.org/specs/bestpra ctices/ [trustedcom...ggroup.org] You'll see what I mean... Caveat Emptor.

Re:I can't wait until you guys realize (5, Funny)

Pope (17780) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716038)

OK, so you can't get the TPM reports for another 10 days, that's fine. The important question is could you just go ahead and use the new cover sheets? That'd be great, thanks.

Re:I can't wait until you guys realize (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14716205)

Translation? Elaboration?

Faster, better, funner (2, Funny)

digitaldc (879047) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716026)

Seriously, i'm waiting for someone to give good benchmarks on these- especially testing for Warcraft.

So you are spending close to $2000 so you can have slightly better graphics in WarCraft? ;)

Re:Faster, better, funner (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14716100)

Yes. Duh.

Re:Faster, better, funner (1)

_KiTA_ (241027) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716231)

No, we're spending close to $2000 so we can get more honorable kills in Arathi Basin. Duh. :)

Now it makes me all more impatient (1, Interesting)

Shivetya (243324) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716027)

for the new iBooks and Minis.

When is the next big Mac get together?

While I like the specs of the new MacBooks, at their price point they don't quite cut it. Perhaps the second revision will make changes. Its just so hard to justify $600+ MacTax for 1lb of less weight and a few minor extras. Case in point CompUSA is selling an Acer duo, (1280x800 display x1400 graphics, 2GB memory, 120gb hdd, for 1299). While I understand that to some their is better engineering in the Mac I doubt the assembly lines used by either is much different). Yeah I know, its the software/experience/quality. There are levels to which all of us assign imporantance to these items. However most of it is opinion and we can all find pro and con examples to back our case. To me the justification of owning one of the new Intel based macs is being able to run any x86 OS.

If they deliver a duo-iBook, say with 13" screen and similar graphics ability I may find my next notebook. Throw out the iSight and give me a modem :). The excuse of not being able to load XP has been pretty much solved as I can find numerous methods of doing so. I really could put to use a laptop that can boot the big 3 OSes.

iBook dream, 1599 for 1.66 duo, x1600 256mb, fw400, usb2, upto 2gb memory, 13" 1280x800, etc. I don't know Apple's screen sizing principles and heard the new Macbook deviated from established norms (is that true?)

The world of Mac is getting closer to me everyday...

Re:Now it makes me all more impatient (1)

Pope (17780) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716067)

I don't know Apple's screen sizing principles and heard the new Macbook deviated from established norms (is that true?)

I guess doing the intelligent thing and actually going to Apple's web site [apple.com] and looking up the specs for yourself is far too difficult? Yeesh.

Re:Now it makes me all more impatient (1)

miller701 (525024) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716146)

Probably not x1600 graphics in the next iBook (MacBook) otherwise there'd be no reason for a Pro line, unless they bump up the MBP to x1900 (or whatever) graphics at the same time. I'm guessing they'll do like the iSight iMac and go with 512MB soldered and one DIMM slot (and x800 mobile graphics). I'm sure they really want to keep the MacBook near $999.

What I really hope they do have is the MagSafe power cord. THAT is the kind of feature that separates Apples from the Wintel machines. It's the kind of feature that a first time laptop buyer might not see the value in, but a person on their second or third laptop will really appreciate.

Why, kiddies? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14716057)

Does anyone else here get the irony of /.-ers spending virtual lifetimes bashing 'Doze, hating every byte of M$ kruftware, and yearning for an environmental catastrophe in Redmond, then getting all excited about the potential of running XP on a new MacBook?

Am I alone here when I utter a collossal WTF?

Now, I do think native speed virtualization would be a major boon for the platform. And, yes, native x86/DirectX gaming on a Mac would be nice.

However, with all of the talk about Mac performance gap, *NIX on the desktop, Win Sux, etc, one would think that the community would get very excited about fast portable, Darwin on dual-core, i.e all of the great native things already going on, and more extensible than Doze will ever be.

Yet, what we hear is crying that, unless it runs Windoze, it is useless or somehow disappointing. WTF, again I ask.

My 550 TiBook is a classic piece of machinery, like the NeXT Cube (got one), Sparc 10/20 (got two), the compact Mac (got two), and other timeless designs.

These new machines signal new life for Apple's manufacturing, and innovation for years to come, thanks to a high-speed portable line and its revenue stream. Get excited about that!

First time I see someone booting XP on a Mac, I'm gonna kick them in the nuts, Roshambo style.

Battery life? (5, Insightful)

merdaccia (695940) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716060)

Does anyone have any idea what the battery life of these things are? It was previously unannounced because they were still testing pre-shipping versions. Well, now they're shipping. And the only thing on the technical specs [apple.com] page is a footnote that says

1. Battery life depends on configuration and use.

Yeah, that helps.

Re:Battery life? (1)

avalys (221114) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716108)

We'll know soon enough.

Steve Jobs has said that the battery life should be about the same as the previous PowerBooks, meaning 4-5 hours.

Re:Battery life? (1)

Jeffrey Baker (6191) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716194)

Eh, "previous powerbooks" like the PowerBook G3 Pismo have battery life approaching 15 hours when equipped with both batteries. And the PowerBook G4 line, while advertised at 4-5 hours, get 3-4 hours in real use.

Come on.. Come on baby.... (-1, Troll)

McFadden (809368) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716104)

Uhhhhh.... uhhhh...... nghhhhhhh... uhhhh......
My god... I think I've just come.........

Oh... wait... It was just a slashdot editorial...?

You're kidding me!

What... You mean they're pushing Apple press releases as if they're god's gift..?

Surely not!

Price Drops? (5, Interesting)

richdun (672214) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716111)

So, we all know that Intel releases incremental speed bumps nearly every quarter or even more frequently, and this seems to have worked well for Apple here. But what about the quarterly (or more) price drops? A series of cuts is scheduled for the Pentium D over April and Q3 2006 that will almost half some prices. Will Apple catch things into even better margins, or will we see much more quickly update specs AND prices?

More Important: What Doesn't Work (4, Insightful)

JoeCommodore (567479) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716144)

As a long-time Mac user (with Macs at work) I am more interested in learning what doesn't work on the new Intel Macs than what does.

So far Classic is a dead issue (pun intended, but unfortunate for us and Apple) and I'm sure there will be more.

To me it's just another cycle of waiting (hoping) vendors update thier products (as well as making the upgrades affordable) or manufacturers bother to re-code thier device drivers to work on yet anothewr new Apple platform.

Re:More Important: What Doesn't Work (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14716328)

Actually, Classic is not dead... it is just not supported. There are people trying to get Classic running on the Intel Macs. Most people will of course not care. Most "switchers" have never even seen Classic, so they could care less. If you really need to run Classic on your Intel Mac, check out this site:
http://www.gibix.net/dokuwiki/en:projects:sheepsha ver [gibix.net]

64 bit (5, Interesting)

dusanv (256645) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716168)

You do realize these laptops are 32 bit only? The 64 bit portable CPU (Merom core) will be available by year end (together with the matching desktop core - Conroe). It also seems that the current core (Yonah) has 64 bit instruction set support (AMD64/EMT64/x86-64, whatever you want to call it) although it has been disabled by Intel. The interesting bit for me will be the upcoming iBook. I want to see how Core Solo stacks up against the G4 (seeing that Duo doesn't really clean out the house against the single G5). I think there may be a couple of surprises.

Re:64 bit (1)

Junks Jerzey (54586) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716296)

You do realize these laptops are 32 bit only? The 64 bit portable CPU (Merom core) will be available by year end (together with the matching desktop core - Conroe).

True, yes, but I think the general realization for 64-bit processors is that unless you're one of the few people who absolutely *needs* them (and you'd know it if you were), there's no benefit for most people. All other things being equal, 64-bit processors are SLOWER than the 32-bit equivalent, because you need that much more memory for pointers and the caching issues drag you down. The complicating factor is that "64-bit" for the x86 also means "nicer instruction set & more registers, " something that's not true for other processor families.

Universal games (1)

boristheflorist (954445) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716210)

Excuse my ignorance but if games start being produced as universal binaries does that mean that will be the end of games just being made for windows? What are the chances of this becoming the norm? Finally, something about the intel macs might actually affect me.

Re:Universal games (2, Informative)

sethadam1 (530629) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716269)

No. You misunderstand the term "universal."

An app is "universal" when it runs on OS X for PowerPC *and* OS X for Intel. It does not mean it runs on other OSes, and incidentally, they do not.

Re:Universal games (2, Informative)

_Pablo (126574) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716298)

I understand your confusions as the word universal does suggest something more than the reality, whic is that Universal Binaries are universal to the Power PC and x86 versions (possibly 68K) of OS X. So it had no impact whatsoever on Windows apps.

Opposite (2, Interesting)

jonoid (863970) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716236)

This is actually the opposite of what happened a few years ago. When Apple came out with the G4 desktops they planned on releasing them in 400MHz, 450MHz, and 500MHz configurations. Due to supply problems or whatever, they ended up downgrading each configuration by 50MHz (so 350, 400, 450) and kept the prices. Of course there was a huge uproar and IIRC Apple ended up discounting the machines.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/1999/10/14/apple_down grades_power_mac_cpus/ [theregister.co.uk]

It's good to know that Apple is now in a position to do the opposite.

2.16GHz upgrade NOT worth it (1)

artifex2004 (766107) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716258)

$270 under educational pricing for the upgrade from 2.0GHz and 2.16GHz, and they don't say there's any increase in FSB, either. Regular pricing is probably even higher. Not worth it!

The inevitable comparison (1, Insightful)

Jeffrey Baker (6191) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716280)

What's great about the MacBook again? It it not compatible with PC Cards, and there are zero available peripherals for its ExpressCard/34 slot. It has no way to read a CompactFlash card except for a USB reader. It has no modem, except for a USB modem. It has no GPRS/EDGE/EVDO/1xRTT wireless WAN card, and no slot for adding one. It has no SmartCard reader. The battery life, although unannounced, is expected to be average.

As far as I can tell, the MacBook lacks any kind of feature that sets it apart, other than running MacOS X. The Acer TravelMate, Ferrari series and the Thinkpad X series seem to be much better computers if you don't need MacOS X.

I'm planning to stay with my 6-year-old PowerBook G3 until Apple releases a computer that's somewhere near as useful.

Store Inventory (1)

rjstanford (69735) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716287)

Has anyone been able to stop by their local Apple store and see if they have display models out? I'm sure they won't have walk-in inventory for a while, until they free up their order backlog, but it would be nice to get a little hands-on time before plunking down real money.

"Price Point" (1)

asternick (532121) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716301)

What is the difference between a "price point" and a "price" or "cost"? Could it also say "the price point remains identically the same?

I Was Down at the CompUSA The Other Day (2, Interesting)

Greyfox (87712) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716317)

Taking a G4 Powerbook for a test drive. The sales droids there were seriously downplaying the MacBook Pro -- "No one knows when they're going to ship, it could be a month or more" and "Almost no software will run natively on them when they're first released" were the two lines I heard the most from several of the sales droids there. I'm going to have to go back when they get their first units in just to see how much the tune has changed. "These are radically faster for not much more money" and "You can run all previous software in an emulator" are the lines I expect to hear then. Sorry guys, but I'm not inclined to buy a machine from a sales droid who went out of his way to mislead me. I'll just find my machine online if I decide to buy one. Pfft.

Battery Life? (0, Redundant)

benbranch (930283) | more than 8 years ago | (#14716326)

So with the faster chips the batteries are going to take a hit right? Apple have been very quiet about MacBook battery life and this makes me fear that should I buy one I am going to need a very long extension cord.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...