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!"
Taken from http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jht ml?articleID=186100229
"The graphics processor of Apple Computer Inc.'s MacBook Pro portable has been deliberately slowed down, a Mac user reported recently, probably as part of the overall effort to lower the heat the machine generates.
According to a posting on the French language site MacBidouille, a user identified as "SpacetitoX" uncovered the underclocking of the MacBook's ATI Radeon Mobility X1600 graphics chip after adding Windows XP to the computer, then running a beta version of the "ATITools" overclocking utility.
By replacing the existing ATI drivers added to the MacBook Pro for dual-booting into Windows XP, SpacetitoX was able to boost one benchmark's result from 61 frames per second to 91."
Funnypics
- FireWire 800 (9-pin) is included, in addition to FireWire 400 (6-pin) (so no, FireWire, and particularly FireWire 800, is not dead, as some like to continually predict)
- 3 USB 2.0 ports are included; 2 on the left, 1 on the right
- The left side ports are: power, 2 USB 2.0, analog and digital optical audio in and out, ExpressCard/34; the right side ports are: DVI (supports VGA, S-Video, composite), 10/100/1000 ethernet, FireWire 800, FireWire 400, 1 USB 2.0, security port
- An 8x dual layer SuperDrive is included (unlike the 15" MacBook Pro)[1]
- While this is known by many, it bears repeating that the wireless chipset in all Intel-based Macs supports 802.11a/b/g, though Apple doesn't advertise 'a'
- The 1680 x 1050 resolution of the 17" display is the same as many desktop 20" widescreen LCDs such as the Apple 20" Cinema Display and the 20" Dell 2007WFP
- Retail $2799, Education/government $2599 with 2.16 GHz Core Duo, 1 GB RAM, 120 GB 5400RPM Serial ATA drive, 256MB ATI Radeon x1600, and 8x dual layer SuperDrive
- For detailed specs, see here
I'd also note that for some people who might think that the 15" MacBook Pro looks like a bad deal next to this, the 17" is simply too large for many people, and many of those same people have no need for the faster dual layer SuperDrive, nor for FireWire 800.
And the Apple we site does not have to explicitly say it for us to know that, yes, of course the 17" MacBook Pro will support "Boot Camp" (and triple booting[2]), which is simply an umbrella marketing name for a collection of technologies that support booting Windows on Intel-based Macs:
- A Compatibility Support Module (CSM, BIOS compatibility layer) for EFI: this is already a non-beta, supported component of the recent rounds of firmware updates for Intel-based Macs, which the 17" MacBook Pro will ship with
- The ability to live-resize partitions on a GPT formatted volumes: this is already a non-beta, supported component of "diskutil" as of 10.4.6
- A collection of Windows drivers for the hardware in Intel-based Macs: almost all of these are non-beta, preexisting third party drivers
- A setup assistant that brings everything together: this is the only part of the solution, from a technical standpoint, that is "beta"
[1] Some may note that the new 17" MacBook Pro, at the same thickness of the 15" MacBook Pro (1.0"), includes an 8x dual layer SuperDrive versus the 4x single layer drive in the 15" model. It might be recalled that the reasoning for not including a faster, dual layer SuperDrive in the 15" MacBook Pro was because of the necessary space not being available inside the case; the 15" MacBook Pro could only use a 9mm tall mechanism as opposed to the 12mm mechanism currently required for dual layer capability and the greater speed. How, then, can the 17" MacBook Pro (or even the previous 17" PowerBook), at the exact same thickness, include this drive? Does this mean Apple was holding back? Is the 8x DL drive due in a 15" MacBook Pro imminently? The answer is no: the reason why the drive didn't (and still doesn't) fit in the 15" MacBook Pro is because the wider trackpad mechanism Apple chose to use encroaches internally on the space needed for a 12mm drive by about 1/8" laterally. However, this is not the case on the 17" MacBook Pro.
[2] Who wants to dual boot, much less triple boot? I'd rather have all of my environments running side by side in virtualization. And yes, I know there are some specific reasons people may want to dual boot (such as games for native 3D graphics support), and that's fine...but other than for those specific tasks, who would really prefer dual/triple booting over virtualization, especially given the excellent benefits Intel VT now offers for virtual machines?
What's this about, then?
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
The hardware was underclocked - you can use the ATI tools to reset the clock speed, then when you reboot in os X the new clock will remain. The setting is stored on the video card.
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?
Oh everything's stolen these days. Why the fax machine is nothing more than a waffle iron with a phone attached!
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
I love my 12" Powerbook. It's SMALL, it's light, it's easy to carry around, it fits in a backpack, it can take a 4' fall onto concrete not even dent (ok, maybe that was just luck). It's perfect. The screen's big enough, and the keyboard is full-sized.
I don't want a giant laptop. I want some features that the bigger ones have, like the illuminated keyboard and maybe a PCCARD slot. I definitely do NOT want the bulk.
Come on, Apple! Gimmie a 12" (or the not-even-rumoured-much 13.1") MacBookPro! And if it can use the same battery as my Powerbook that'd be nice!
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is kinky.
At $2799 the 17" MacBook Pro with a 2.16Ghz core duo costs the same as the 15.4" model with 2.16 Ghz core duo, one must assume a price drop is imminent on the 15.4" model.
My other sig is extremely clever...
Lots of reports of noise and excessive heat from the first rount of MBPs. Apple's much touted fix resulted in the problem getting worse for many owners (see macintouch.com MBP reader reports). So these issues are still out there, and the heat issue is severe (MBP so hot you can't touch it in places near the keyboard).
Here's hoping that these issues are resolved this time around.
I had a 17" g4 and it was absolutely fantastic. I write code, and having all your .h and .m.cc.c.whatever files open at the same time, as well as all the interface windows open all at once is a great boon to efficient programming. However, eventually i came to hate lugging it around (at 7 pounds, still lighter than most of my friends shitty dells at the time) and i finally downgraded to a 12".
best choice i ever made. the 12" is not noticeably slower for doing the stuff i do. (compiles a tiny bit slower, but whateva) and it still runs the 23" cinema when on my desk. weighs just over half as much, and fits in a much smaller space (so i can lug around my big nikon d70 as well)
Anyhow, props to Apple for releasing the mothership of laptops, the 17" really is a sweet machine, but the second they announce a 13" intel based lappy, i am there.
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.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
I got one of the 15" ones just a few days ago. It rocks.
If you have a significant other that isn't interested in computers, get one of these and then demonstrate Frontrow with the remote to go through your photos/music/video. You might find they suddenly take an interest...
Yes, Apple's driver supports the "a" functionality. Also, on page 62 of Apple's MacBook Pro user's guide, it confirms that it is capable of connecting to "any 802.11a-, 802.11b-, or 802.11g-compliant product."
Apple has so far used the Broadcom BCM4311 and Atheros AR5000 Series (AR5006EX) wireless chipsets, both of which support 802.11a/b/g. Don't know what the status with regard to Linux is for any of those chipsets.
Of course, I've used RHEL, Fedora Core, and CentOS happily with networking, in virtualization, on my MacBook Pro, so there's no need to worry about "Linux drivers".
-Kurt
"We can categorically state we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - UK military spokesman, July 2007
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
Ugn. please.
every time there is an apple thread, someone comes out and says 'wait PC's are cheaper!! and here is a comparison!!' and then some apple fanatic comes back and refutes it and blah blah blah.
Look, my time is worth money. windows and linux take effort. I want my tools to work, so I can get to the business at hand. when my tools dont work, i have to spend time fixing them simply so i can get back to work. Having used windows previously (which made me even more of a mac fan) I can tell you that my mac 'just works' and windows does not (i mean, it works, kinda, if you know how to set it up right and keep it running, oh, and reboot every so often and.. and.... and...).
So, again, my time is worth money, if the mac were 5 times as expensive as the dell, it would still pay itself off in productivity in about a month in comparison. So, feel free to buy the cheaper machine, more power to yah. I would rather spend my free time with friends and family and my work time being creative. (as opposed to spending my free time fixing my computer, and my work time jumping through hoops to get shit done)
When dell gives those 750$ off coupons they boost the base price so it's not really as good as it seems. So, when buying a dell take a look at the prices when they are not offering any promotions to compare. The deals are still pretty good though, you can get a discount of 25% off or so.
The thing is, Apple's not really competing with Dell as Dell's laptop's are made inexpensiveley. Dell can't be beat on value but Apple's laptops are really nicely made with excellent keyboards and very solid cases. With IBM's laptop division gone to Lenovo, I think Apple laptops are poised to take the high end market, a great place for a company looking for large profit margins.
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.
Even so, it might be worth noting that Apple has the best track record across all computer manufacturers, in terms of "initial quality" (out of the box reliablity/usage characteristics), overall quality, lack of need for repairs, and technical support, consistently, and has for years, according to consumer organizations like Consumer Reports.
I think it's safe to say that ANY first gen product from any manufacturer will have problems, but even so, Apple actually has consistently less problems with quality, and specifically "initial quality", than any other vendor, at least by whatever metric Consumer Reports uses to come up with their reports every 6 months.
Still, even considering the above, it's always wise advice to wait for the second generation of ANY new product. Whether it's a new vehicle platform, or a laptop. (One might presume, however, that some things Apple learned from the 15" MacBook Pro rollout have been applied to the initial rollout of the 17" MacBook Pro.)
They also released a universal binary version of Final Cut Studio.
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
It's exactly the other way around: if you want to be immune from Windows malware, then you should run Windows inside a virtual machine. Then you can restrict it to its own virtual disk (which would just be a big file on your Mac disk), restrict it from accessing the network if you want to, and so on. On the other hand, if you dual-boot into Windows, then a Windows program with sufficient privileges can destroy your Mac partition as easily as it can with the Windows partition: just run fdisk. So there is no fundamental level of extra security in dual-booting.
1. Maintain a tenuous balance on the edge of total collapse for decades 2. ??? 3. Profit
Only in this case, instead of nobody being sure who knows what step 2 is, we all know that Jobs knows, but he won't tell anybody.
English is easier said than done.
Spending nearly $3000 on a computer that isn't nearly as powerful as $3000 would buy me otherwise? No thanks... I'm waiting for a sub-$1000 Mac so I can just have a Mac... I'm not going to spend obscene money on something that quickly will be outdated. Even if it is a Mac.
The price is always right if someone else is paying.
I went to the apple site to look at the new powerbook... (excuse me, macbookpro) what did I see? Gray text on a black background! I'm not an old codger by any means, but I can't read that.
Maybe you should adjust the brightness and/or contrast of your monitor. Very light grey text on a black background is the ideal color scheme for monitors. Since the screen is emitting light, even for "black" colored items, it has a tendency to cause eyestrain. Staring at a light for extended periods is just not what our eyes were designed for. The highest contrast of colors is black and white. We're accustomed to black on white due to historical printing technologies, but while it provides the best contrast it also emits the most light and causes the most eyestrain. Reversing the color scheme to be white text on a black background keeps the contrast as high as possible but minimizes the light emission, and hence, minimizes the eyestrain. Darkening the white text to a very light grey helps to soften it a little and further reduce brightness, while only minimally affecting the contrast.
So Apple is using the color scheme that is exactly the ideal, as recommended by numerous independent studies and researchers and as recommended by every design and usability manual I have ever read. This leads me to two conclusions. One, if you're having a problem you probably have your monitor messed up. Two, some people will complain no matter what you do.
Was the Apple user interface group out back having a smoke when this page was being designed?
I doubt it. You'll note the interface tends to a medium to light grey. This provides the ideal contrast compromise with both grey text on black backgrounds (ideal for viewing on monitors and variations of which are the standard for terminal windows and other text interfaces for those of us who have to use them all day) and with black text on a white background, which is the standard printed text view, used by common text editors, word processors, and when viewing anything destined for print.
I can't find anywhere on the site where I can send them a quick email to point out their faux pas, so I have to satisfy myself with ranting here.
Hopefully they won't follow your recommendations, but there is a "contact us" link at the bottom of the page (and all their Web pages), which provides feedback links for the Web site and all the products. The one you want is This one.
Serious gaming is an oxymoron.
If you want to game, get a PlayStation. If you need a computer to get work done, get a Mac.
If you want to run the latest virus, get Windows.
Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
Funny--I'm hearing people I wouldn't expect, long-time Wintel users, talking about buying one of the new Macs. It seems there is a lot of pent-up demand for Macs, which has been held back mainly by fear.
What if I get a new Mac and after a few months decide that I actually like Windows better?
What if Apple goes out of business and I can't get software?
What if my employer requires me to use a particular Windows application?
What if a program or game that I want is only available for Windows?
Suddenly, all of these worries have vanished.
- The 1680 x 1050 resolution of the 17" display is the same as many desktop 20" widescreen LCDs such as the Apple 20" Cinema Display and the 20" Dell 2007WFP
Who again is NOT totally angered that Apple won't offer high resolution displays. Comparing the pixel count to their 20" Display is SAD, SO SAD...
I have a 2002 Toshiba Laptop with a 15" screen that does 1600x1200, and a 17" Laptop that does 1920x1200...
Why is Apple still the poor cousin when it comes to graphics? (Let alone the Video solution they are using is 2-5 times slower than offerings from other companies.
I was really hoping they would offer people that work with graphics (even as a hobby) a high resolution display.
And if people complain about tiny print or tiny buttons, once again I will say, Why in the HELL does OSX NOT do a better job of Scaling the UI? Even WindowsXP does a better job, OSX should at least catch up to such a low bar.
Besides, I have good eyes, and the 'smooth' lines and crisp video you can get at a higher DPI is more than worth it. I can at least play WMV HD 1080p on my 1yr old 17" laptop, why in HECK can't I play that resolution of Video or Movies on a Mac of all things. An area of the industry they pride themselves on. (Yes I know the 30" screen has 1920x1200, but we are talking laptops here.)
Every Mac user needs to say, Ok, Apple, (A,B,C are really good, but you totally blew it on D,E,F, and G features.) Why is Apple the cheap version of what I can buy from Dell?
That's the IR receiver for the Front Row remote...
You might want to get that sarcasm detector looked at.
This sig intentionally left blank.
"right now there is no sub 6 lb. Apple laptop . . . Too bad"
Try doing some research before making claims like that. The 15-inch MacBook Pro weighs 5.6 lbs. Besides, your counterexample has only a 12-inch screen. It's not really fair to compare its weight vs. that of a 17-inch machine and then call the latter "porky."
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. :)
Unfortunately, just using an older video chip would not give longer battery life. Mainly because newer chips are manufactured with smaller transistors. So the newer chips can do more work with more transistors taking up about the same amount of space and power. Newer chips also have better power management features, to shut down parts of the chip when they are not in use.
Now, if you took some of the new features of the new chips and removed them, you'd have a smaller/cheaper chip that would take less power. I think this would be a great idea. The main problem is that the manufacturers think they wouldn't make enough money on them.
Intel makes ultra-low-power (ULV) CPUs, but they're not used all that much in mainstream laptops. I suppose people still want fast computers, even when they don't have that much need for the speed.
And don't forget the wireless and LCD backlight. Those are other major contributors of power utilization. Hopefully OLED will help resolve the latter. I'm not sure if there's any hope in reducing power used by radio transceivers.
Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
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.
I understand - what I'm saying is that the performance gain in hardware is pretty much canceled out by having to run the app through the code-morphing Rosetta foo. Since the only thing that I really have performance issues with is Photoshop, I don't yet have a compelling reason to upgrade.
That's not to say that I don't drool over them a little, but I have one of the last Powerbook G4 models, so trying to upgrade now would get me a smack from the spouse.
What is this sort of reactionary condemnation of people that want to play sophisticated games on their Macs or run a different OS or experiment with changing driver code? The distilled quote seems to be, "I use my Mac for x, therefore user who try something else are violating the intention of the manufacturer." So what? Tweaking hardware to see what it can do or to expose a possible bad design decision or (shock, horror) to learn something new is interesting to a lot of folks. Sheesh.
Its just like working on a car, guys. You redo your interior and the engine blows? Hey, the manufacturer is liable. You chip your turbo up from 7psi to 18psi (removing an "artificial limitation" on the hardware) and the engine blows? Its your own damn problem, and you have some expensive head work in your future.
I don't see any reason why computer-mods wouldn't be covered under the same framework. Paint your case and the computer blows up? Their problem. Overclock your video card and it overheats and fries something? Your problem. Or are you saying that's "not fair"?
You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
There's a difference though:
The first situation is easily sortable. The second situation depends on whether the manufacturer will replace the machine under warranty. If they won't (which is reasonable -- you would have to go through some awkward steps to do this) then you've got a nice new Apple-branded flower press.
Personally, I'd love to bump the clock rate, if I had one. But I'd wait to see if the only adverse effect is a more noisy fan. I'd also likely wait for an OS X utility that would switch it, because I'd want to raise the clock speed only when I'm about to *use* it, which would likely only be for certain things (i.e. the latest games which don't play well with a lowered clock).
-Q
Sounds neat; just out of curiosity, what are you using for the virtualization?
Parallels Workstation. Takes full advantage of Intel VT, too.
And perhaps I'm revealing my ignorance here, but how does the guest OS on a virtualized system handle networking? There must be some sort of psuedo-device driver that you install so that it can talk to the virtualized 'hardware,' or else the virtualization software must emulate some kind of commonly-supported networking hardware. I guess I'm just curious what you have to do to the guest OS, if anything, to get it to work inside the sandbox.
It can either be NATed behind the host OS, or it can have its very own IP on the same network as the host machine. The virtual machine has an emulated network interface with its own MAC address. You don't have to "do" anything in the guest OS. It's a very generic network card that has had drivers available (and in my case, always included) in every OS I've installed so far.
Right now all my equipment (Mac stuff, anyway) is PPC based; however I find the whole virtualization concept really intriguing and I'm hoping that by my next round of upgrades, it'll be sufficiently mature to make dual-booting (or having a separate PC for Linux connected with a KVM switch, my current solution) unnecessary.
Well, you'll likely be very happy then, because, even at this early stage, that's exactly what I'm using it for right now. All on one machine that I can carry around with me.
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.
Consoles are limited by serious shortcomings for "serious gamers".
It is NOT an oxymoron. There are those whose primary recreation
is computer games. You don't have to like it.
Your complete dismissal of pc's and mac's as a gaming platform
shows your lack of regard and respect for others who are not as you.
While the mac may not be the greatest gaming platform (argued ad infinitum here)
the top shelf games are available: world of warcraft, UT, Sims, etc.
I personally have played on consoles and have way more fun playing
games on a pc or mac platform. I don't play sports simulations though,
which seem to be huge on console platforms.
music lover since 1969
Can I get bare-bones hardware to install Windows on, or do I have to pay the Apple Tax.
Just had to try it out: s/Windows/Apple/ s/Linux/Windows/
Serious gaming is an oxymoron.
If you want to game, get a PlayStation. If you need a computer to get work done, get a Mac.
If you want to run the latest virus, get Windows.
And if you want to hear excuses for why you shouldn't want some feature X, read an Apple thread.
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.
Notice that the bigger notebook gets an extra hour's worth of power. Odd they made this choice, since on the PB line both the 15 and the 17 got about the same life per charge (about 5.5 hours).
Another artificial differentiation between it and its little brother? The 17 also has FW800 and the 8X SuperDrive, which were dropped from the 15" version.
Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
but every ounce of space counts
In space, an ounce is weightless.
Turn up the volume!!
=)
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
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
The trackpad interferes with the 12mm drive but not with the 9mm drive. I bet the edge of the trackpad, by his description, rests slightly over the 9mm drive, but the 12mm drive has no such leeway. On a 17" MBP there is no need for overlapping the devices because the 17" MBP is that much bigger than a 15" MBP
Again, read the post. The trackpad lies on top of the space the 12mm DL DVD-RW drive would sit, so they used the 8mm DVD-RW drive instead in the 15" MBP.
GPL Deconstructed
Your girlfriend certainly did. :)
Oh wait. This is /. ...
yes, in fact, it is, but the 20" display is intended to be viewed from further away so it's lower dpi is more excusable. A 1920x1200 17" display is a glorious thing. Hopefully Apple will invent it soon.
Numerous complaints about heat have come up in the Apple 17" annoucement. To this I say remember the test environment. We the Northen Canadians do not run around with jeans and sneakers on. We wear wool long johns and snowpants and snowmobile boots in general. We also are wearing flame-suseptible, three-inch whale blubber sealskin jackets. At all times we layer in the Arctic Area. Layering for the rest of the cool challenged is the concept of multiple 'layers' of clothing between you and your body. I know for those that live in the midwest it makes sense to jump around in an oversized T-shirt, however those of us more north and north of you consider leaving the house with only one North Face fleece jacket on as uncouth. So therefore, a warm laptop is a good thing, not a bad one. It will provide additional warmth whether you are uploading your seal clubbing statistics from Baffin Island, or selling your gold stocks online from Dawson City.
no, it's 60% thicker, not 161%. Some additional points in Dell's favor to offset its extra size (in addition to the vastly superior display and graphics) are it's S-Video port, VGA connector, 6 USB ports, memory card reader, and real PC-Card slot. No, the Dell isn't as small as the Apple but it offers more for less money and it's more user-servicable. Try changing the hard drive in each and then say which is better. That's a real issue for me since neither offers a 160GB drive yet.
Speaking of tired arguments, how about the one that suggests that Apple is like BMW? As an owner of a BMW I'm not sure that's a good thing, but at least BMW does have real technical differentiation from it's competitors. Apple uses PC parts and puts them in a shiny box. If Dell is like a Chevy, then Apple isn't a BMW, it's a GMC. They're just like Chevy only with a fancy grill (and you pay more).
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.
What's wrong with this? BookEndz docks
;)
They're most likely more reliable than the crappy connectors on those other laptops. And as a bonus, they don't even go up to 400$ in price.
Apple doesn't have to do _everything_, you know
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?