Slashdot Mirror
Ars Technica Reviews the MacBook
phaedo00 writes "Ars Technica has performed another of their in-depth and thorough hardware reviews. The subject in this review is the newly released MacBook. From the article: 'The Apple portable web site proudly announces that the "family is finally complete." What began with an announcement from Steve Jobs at the MacWorld conference in January has come full circle with the release of the MacBook this week. Every Apple laptop is Intel powered and moving in what I would consider is the right direction. The laptop line is finally better delineated by pro and consumer features, and the prices have been fixed at points that better reflect the minute differences in the models.'"
Apple loves price holes. Just look at the iPod. They used to have a 20GB regular iPod and a 6GB iPod mini. At that point, a lot of people are already going to be thinking that 6GB's just isn't enough, but if they want more they have to jump up to 20. I'm sure a lot of people who weren't really looking for something that big made the jump because there was nothing in between, and who wants to go down a level? Characteristically, Apple then introduced the nanos (which had even smaller hard drives) to replace the minis and then upped the capacity of the video iPods. Now, you can get either a 30GB model or a 4GB model. That's a huge hole and forces a lot of people who only need 10GB's or so to jump up to 30. It's amazing marketing, although I'm sure it makes some (myself among them) resentful at being herded like that.
I've always pictured the color of OS zealotry as a sort of bright flamingo pinkish hue
You could always, you know, buy a not-iPod.
Just a thought.
Haida Manga
Au contraire, mon frère! It seems the MacBook isn't really a "laptop" anymore!
Real programmers can write assembly code in any language. -- Larry Wall
Now, you can get either a 30GB model or a 4GB model. That's a huge hole and forces a lot of people who only need 10GB's or so to jump up to 30. It's amazing marketing, although I'm sure it makes some (myself among them) resentful at being herded like that.
If you put it that way, it sounds like Apple is being very manipulative. However, if you look at the prices, the price difference is relatively not as drastic between the 4GB and 30GB models:
* 200 USD == 2GB iPod nano
* 250 USD == 4GB iPod nano
* 300 USD == 30GB iPod
* 400 USD == 60GB iPod
Basically, Apple can buy a larger harddrive per $$$ now. Why not offer this benefit when competing w/ others?
I think it's an issue of it being easier to tell the assemblers to gob it on rather than risk someone not getting enough.
Considering heat is a major engineering issue for laptops, I'd say they should probably train the people to use the right amount, not just swing one way or the other. A thermal paste layer of more then 0.003-0.005 inches thick can be less effective then no thermal paste at all. The thermal paste is used to "close the air gaps" between surface imperfections in the heat sink and the device being cooled. Thermal paste should never be considered or applied as a blanket layer between the two. Direct metal to metal contact should still be available as much as possible between the two surface areas and will result in far better heat transfer.
This is just a wild ass guess but from what I've seen in pictures and guides for using thermal paste with CPU's floating around the internet, almost everyone uses and suggests entirely too much. Oozing out the side or enough that you can leave a fingerprint behind is a good indicator. Don't believe me? Do some temperature experiments yourself.
is it impossible to keep a laptop cool now?
Considering everyone wants faster CPUs and higher benchmarks, the answer is "yes"
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
For me the 3 extra lbs make a huge difference, let me explain you why. First it's not all about the weight, but also about the physical space a laptop takes. Second, I agree that this extra weight/space is not really annoying when you CARRY it, but in fact it really impacts the way you USE it. If you are the kind of person who exclusively use your laptop laid on a desk or occasionally on your laps for short periods of time (< 1h) and carry it in a regular laptop bag, then yes maybe you won't care about 5 lbs vs. 2 lbs. But if you are like me and like to use it like a book, to carry it with one hand with no bag when you walk short distances, to being sit comfortably on a couch with the laptop laid on ONE lap (because it's so small), etc, then 5 lbs vs. 2 lbs makes a lot of differences.
In addition to the weight/space advantage, such small laptops generally never overheat because they use ULV (ultra low voltage) processors, they have no fans so they are totally silent, and they have a long battery life: about 5h with my laptop, close to 7h with the new Panasonic R5, and probably around 10h with the T5 (Panasonic advertises 15h) !
Ultraportables (generally it means anything less than 1 kg = 2.2 lbs) have really changed the way I feel about laptops. It's as if there was a kind of "barrier" at 2-3 lbs: suddendly when you go under this barrier a lot of things become possible that you would not do with a 3+ lbs laptop.