MacBook Pros Upgraded and Shipped
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.
macrumor.com says that they're getting the upgraded model.
Cheers,
Ian
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.
from http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/design.html Pretty slick.
Apparently, it's been used on countertop deep fryers for a while now (after some really horrible incidents where people pulled or tripped over cords and got hot oil spilled on them).
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
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.
Here is the compatibility report from MacInTouch. They have complied a quite a bit of reader feedback. There is also a report on Rosetta compatibility.
And the knowledge that they fear is a weapon to be used against them...
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.
Ignoring, for the moment, the architecture behind Safari I think that people get too hung up on "what" and forget the "why." There are two big problems with IE+Windows. One is that it mingles code for file browsing, web browsing, and vital parts of the OS. Basically, it mixes code very insecurely in ways that allow interaction with the internet to potentially cause serious changes to the core of the OS. It also allows local users to abuse the Web browser and gain access to escalated privileges. Basically, it is an insecure and basically unfixable architectural mistake.
The second issue is not technical. As a monopoly it is illegal for MS to leverage their OS monopoly to gain a Web browser monopoly. The most common way to do this is bundling both products together, which MS did. MS supplies multiple components of an overall computer: OS, applications, mice, etc. Because they have a monopoly on one, they cannot legally bundle the others with that one. They can bundle their mouse with every copy of Office sold, but they cannot bundle Office or the mouse with their OS.
It is important to note that this does not mean an end user can't buy a bundle that includes Windows and a computer and IE. Retailers are free to bundle anything they want, so long as they don't have monopolies. Dell can bundle all of MS's products and only sell that combination and there is no legal issue. Only MS is legally bound not to do so. They have to sell them separately to Dell so that Dell can choose the best browser to sell to their customers, even though the market forces them to sell Windows as the OS on those computers.
Apple does not have a monopoly on desktop OS's or Web browsers so they can bundle the two. If they gained a monopoly on either, they could not. The same goes for IBM, and pretty much any Linux distributor.
To summarize, the problems are the insecurity of an architecture that commingles the core of the OS with a Web browser and illegal business practices. I haven't seen either problem with any alternative OS's.
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... for 1299.
Some of the hardware differences:
To be fair, bumping up the 1.8GHz Mac to 2GB Ram & the 120GB drive puts the cost at $2699. At that point you may as well add another $200 and get the 2.0GHz chip too. But is having a laptop with the above hardware improvements that runs OS X worth twice as much cash? That's a personal decision, but I bet lots of folks will vote with their wallets on this one.
In my mind notebooks are the only sector of the personal computer market where you really do get what you pay for. Regardless of the brand, use a $3000 notebook for a month then try to go back to a $1500 one. You won't be pleased.
--Mid
Compare for yourself:
MacBook Pro Specs
Acer Aspire 5670 Specs
Just to be pedantic: The WebCore/WebKit frameworks are sort-of tied into the OS. If you replace/trash Safari.app, you have not touched the parts that actually do the job of rendering web content. You also can't just replace the version of Safari that shipped with your computer (speaking in general terms... there are means to use the latest versions, but these often have the requirement of the latest OS anyways). In these regards Safari/MacOS X is similar to IE.
However, Finder.app does not use Safari, and dependancies are few and far between (Help.app would be one), so this is a much more limited thing than IE.
Actually, if you knew the majority of hardware problems with the initial G4 PowerBook were all related to the case (which had problems with it's hinges - which got stiff and cracked, the plastic border round the side which split apart due to stress from the hindges and weak points such as the audio port, the cable for the LCD panel which got streched leading to the displays breaking down, the rubber feet were always coming off and this lead to overheating and stability problems - and this is just a partial list), you'd understand why it's significant, and why the OP has an valid point.
Sticking with with almost an identical form factor is still significant.