Slashdot Mirror
Apple Announced 17" MacBook Pro
artlu writes "According to Reuters news, Apple has announced the launch of the 17" MacBook Pro. The new MacBook will retail for $2,799, come with iLife '06, and begins shipping next week. Details are not yet on Apple's website, but hopefully these notebooks will be triple booting as well!"
Isn't that more indicative of the drivers used in Windows XP though?
Or were the benchmarks done in OSX then in Windows in which case other issues could arise.
Also, newer beta drivers are always improving things and tweaking applications.
Theres no way you could determine if the Mac driver was underclocking in OSX without doing the benchmarks in OSX.
liqbase
I wish the 12" MacBook would get here. I am in the market right now for an ultraportable for my wife, and would probably get an Apple if they offered it.
The world moves for love. It kneels before it in awe.
Same pixels as the 20" lcd cinema display.
120gig SATA drive
2.16ghz Duo's
256meg ati graphics
http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/
Since my own blurb for this was rejected (no blame on the editors, they were probably flooded with stories on this), I'll state an observation here: The 17" PowerBook G4 is now gone, but the 12" model stll hasn't been updated yet. Is that an indication that the rumors about a 13.3" MacBook to replace the 12" PowerBook and the 14" iBook are true?
This is a First Gen product from apple a company who doesn't exactly have the best track record with 1st gen products. You may wish to wait 3-4 months till the next revision comes out if stability is important to you.
But the 1680x1050 panel is nice. Wish I could buy a couple of 17 inch LCDs that size.
I'm really glad to hear that Firewire 800 is still there. I didn't realize how much of a mental dealbreaker this was for me until I saw it and felt relieved. All of my external drives are triple interface (FW400/FW800/USB), but I really prefer using 800. Speed is important for me when I'm moving around lots of data; it's not uncommon for me to have to move 40 gigs from one drive to another a couple of times a week. FW800 is also fast enough that I can keep my Virtual PC partitions on it and not really have any noticible slowdown from the internal drive.
-- I'm old enough to have lived through six different meanings of the word "hacker."
I just had a quick look at the Dell site, and I couldn't find any laptops with higher specs at any price. Perhaps I was looking in the wrong place. Could you provide a link please?
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
-Kurt
"We can categorically state we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - UK military spokesman, July 2007
As for Intel VT (Vanderpool) technology, its coming in the 64-bit Merom CPU this fall. Perhaps then I'll be ready to upgrade my current Powerbook G4 to a triple OS laptop (which I need as a systems admin).
No, VT is here today, on the current Core Duo T2500 Apple is using in all Intel-based Macs. Parallels Workstation takes full advantage of Intel VT, today. You don't have to wait to have your triple (simultaneously running) OS environment, since I'm looking at it on my MacBook Pro in front of me right now.
I don't know the ins and outs of virtualization, but it seems to me that if I'm running Windows apps side-by-side with native Mac apps, I expose myself to the same spyware, viruses, and other annoyances inherent to Windows. I'd MUCH rather have Windows restricted to its own little disk partition, which I could nuke any time I need to. And since (1) the only Windows apps I'd want to run are games, and (2) it supposedly takes only about 15 seconds to boot these things, I'd just as soon boot into Windows when I absolutely need to and keep my MacOS main partition "pristine."
Well, yes, if all you're using is games, you'd need to dual boot anyway, since you'd need native 3D graphics support. But ignoring that for a second:
There is nothing about virtualization that would make the Mac environment any more susceptible to anything in the Windows environment: the Windows environment is still completely sandboxed, and doesn't have ANY access to the Mac partition(s) unless you were to explicitly grant it. Theoretically, in order to even touch anything in the Mac environment, a piece of Windows malware would have to exploit a vulnerability in the virtualization software itself, that could be exploited via Windows, AND could also be used to affect the host's filesystem. Ironically, it would actually be EASIER in a dual-boot configuration: a hypothetical piece of Windows malware could include a rudimentary driver to recognize HFS+ volumes, at which point it could then install whatever it wished in the Mac environment, or otherwise alter the contents of the Mac OS X partition.
Of course, the likelihood of either of those things happening is extremely remote.
The funny thing is, that the "nuke any time I need to" is actually much, much, much easier in virtualization than anything else: the entire Windows "volume" resides in a file on the Mac OS X disk. You can keep a backup of it, and if anything were to ever happen, you could simply delete it, and duplicate your backup pristine Windows "volume" - since it's just a file - in seconds.
But that also ignores that, while Windows (or another x86-based OS) run on an Intel-based Mac could be subject to the vulnerabilities of that operating system, it is still typically:
- completely isolated from the network, operating "behind" the host operating system
- not used for traditional tasks typically used as attack vectors, like email, web browsing, and downloading files
- usually not used as the primary operating system
- able to be completely restored relatively easily and quickly from a default image, if compromised
this is nice, but who would have thought the next Power...MacBook Pro would come out, instead of a 'consumer line' (read, NOT a ~2800$ laptop) MacBook to really get ppl switching.
For me I'm really starting to fall for (or lean hard towards) a Mac Mini Duo -- not only can you triple boot on it, there's now video of it doing 'fast OS switching', much as it does its 'fast user switching'.
Damn, this is getting fun.
fak3r.com
You have to realize that Heat = Wasted Electricity. On a laptop, battery life is bad enough without worrying about the graphics processor killing your battery. I'm sure they could build a laptop with 20 hours battery life. But nobody really seems to be focussing on this. Low power chip + old school graphics card because it doesn't affect office work anyway, and you could probably have a pretty low power computer. Use a slower hard drive, and give it enough ram that it doesn't need to have a swap file, and you'd probably get quite a bit more of life out of the thing
Um, do you understand the concept of 'power saving features'? And I see you are already modded 'insightful'? I am actually on SlashDot and having to explain that laptops DO power saving on their own. Geesh.
This is why a Laptop can and will slow the Video and Hard Drive and even the CPU when on Batteries based on your settings.
However if you are plugged into an AC Outlet, THE COMPUTER SHOULD PERFORM AT FULL SPEED.
So when you are on battery, the performance of most of the components in the Laptop Scale down to whatever level you set and find acceptable. I have a 2Ghz Laptop that will drop the CPU down to 500mhz performance range when on battery, and will slow the video card down to the point is only good for doing word processing. You can also set the laptop to not scale down at all for the sake of performance.
This is what laptops are made to do. There is NO benefit that Apple had to reduce the performance of the computer, just for the sake of batteries - NONE.
Saving batter power is not a credible excuse for a feature reduction on a Laptop of all things.
You also realize that even the 'slowed' down version of the ATI Video is considerably slower and less 'efficient' than mobile GPUs like you would find in a standard Dell or many other brands. So the video is already slower and has less RAM starting out than other laptop brands.
There is NO way this is a good thing. PERIOD.
Once again, Apple is NOT LEADING technically, and they are STILL NOT EVEN keeping up. Macs used to be the technology kings, now they are the 'cheap' version of what you can get from other companies. Why aren't Apple Mac users angered by this, instead of buying the BS from Apple? Why can't we demand Apple to be a 'technology' leader without being called heretics?
This new laptop doesn't even 'look' as cool as the laptops from Dell that have been out for almost a year, and the Dell Laptops from 1 Year ago are actually faster on some things, like video, and this isn't even comparing the performance of the current offerings from Dell and other companies that are still a generation ahead of the 'new' Apple notebook.
I was half excited at the announcement, and the Video performance was the first thing I noticed (before even reading about the slower clock speeds). The second thing I noticed is the Display resolution on the 17" models even. What in the heck are they thinking? Different I guess, but for doing graphics work I like the 1920x1600 17" laptop screen I bought over a year ago. Even my 2002 Toshiba 15" had 1600x1200. Why do I have to go with a lower resolution display if I want a Mac? So much for leading...
Why in the heck is Apple NOT focusing on graphics people, those of us that demand high resolution displays. For illustrating to photo editing and even how about HD Video? I can play a WMV 1080p on my 1yr old Laptop and I can't on anything Mac has to offer. SAD. (Don't go into the tiny print and icons with higher resolutions, OSX should have been doing better at a scalable UI long before now, at least meet the WindowsXP level for goodness sake.)
Mac Users deserve better. PERIOD.
Sounds neat; just out of curiosity, what are you using for the virtualization?
A friend of mine sent me a link to Parallels, which allows you to run different OSes under OS X. Haven't tried it yet, but the guy who sent it to me did. "It works", says he.
More than that I don't know. He's not exactly chatty. :)
RAM uses power too. Generally ~10W per desktop DDR module (512/1024mb, depends) and 2-5w per SODIMM module. So more ram isn't exactly an answer.
Well, you could try MacCinePaint and see if it has filters that you want. Or Aperture - from what I hear it's pretty fast when it does support what you want to do.
So, has anyone else noticed this?
Pricing for the MacBook pro:
17", 2.16GHz, 1GB, 100GB 7200RPM (not to mention 8x superdrive and firewire 800): $2799
15.4", 2.16GHz, 1GB, 100GB 7200RPM (4x superdrive, firewire 400): $2899
Certainly makes me want to buy the 15.4" model now, let me tell you.
Oh, wait.
If you change that setting, and you cook your machine, it's your own fault.
Happen to know, say empirically, if is in fact will happen? Did Apple just underclock the card to save battery life/fan noise (in which case it'd be nice if they ramped it up when it's plugged in, vs. on battery) or is the fan and friends not able to dissipate the heat from an upclocked video card?
--
$tar -xvf
No, you just explained the exact opposite. The 15" and 17" are the very same thickness and therefore there is no technical reason for the 15" not to also have the dual-layer drive.
Um, yes, there is a technical reason. The 17" is both wider and deeper than the 15". There are things in the 15" that get in the way, thickness-wise, that DO NOT in the 17", period (like the trackpad and the keyboard). You don't have to believe it, but it's not an artificial reason, or to get people to "buy the 17" by arbitrarily keeping the DL drive out of the 15. The word directly from an engineer at Apple:
Actually the reason for the thinner 9.5 mm ODD in MBP15 is because it overlaps the keyboard front-to-back. The 17 is deeper front-to-back, hence the keyboard does not overlap the ODD and it can use the 12.7 mm ODD.
This is one reason why the G4 15" is 1.1" thick - it uses the 12.7 mm ODD.
(Posts are already proliferating on various Mac sites making the exact same observation.)
Yes, and they're all wrong.
You forgot to mention that the MBP has an iSight, gigabit (vs 100megabit) ethernet, firewire 800, is 1" thin, and weighs several pounds less. Plus, it comes with great software like iLife.
Parallels.
Parallels creates a bridge betwen the guest (virtual) network interface and the host (physical) network interface. This appears as Realtek RTL-8029 card to the guest OS. The guest OS can then request a DHCP lease, participate in broadcast protocols on your LAN, connect to the Internet via your LAN router, etc.
Surprisingly little. The emulated video interface is an i815. The emulated mouse is a psmouse. The emulated network card is a Realtek. The emulated hard drive is an IDE interface. Debian/Linux detected all that hardware automatically and Just Worked. Other hardware (bluetooth, airport, sleep) doesn't matter to the guest OS; the host OS handles all that guff. Even the dual-touch touchpad scrolling works inside the guest OS because Parallels emulates it as scrollwheel events. The video performance is not good enough for movie playback but perfectly acceptable for a GNOME desktop.
Linux inside Parallels on a Macbook Pro is very close to perfect. Parallels has taken away the last thing that annoyed me with Linux - driver support - and made it a non-issue. I've been running Linux inside Parallels for a week now and I'm very happy with the results.
My Thinkpad A21p (Announce date: 25 Sep 2000) has a 15" 1600x1200 TFT. We're talking about a five year old laptop here - granted, IBM was the leader in laptop display resolution... but all laptops should have high-resolution displays.
Yes, I am pretty astounded that Apple did not go that little extra to 1920x1200 for the 17" MacBook Pro. This is Apple, the company known for being good for visual work and their top of the line notebook can't render 1:1 the full HDTV resolution of 1920x1080 on the built in screen? My VAIO can and plenty of other PC notebooks can.
I can't wait for 300dpi LCD's. OSX would be spectacular.
War crimes, torture, lies, illegal spying... Would someone give Bush a blowjob, already, so he can be impeached?