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.'"

5 of 453 comments (clear)

  1. Benchmarks by astrosmash · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What's most interesting are the benchmark results. While some screamed bloody murder over Apple's apparent downgrade to Intel's integrated graphics chipset, the new MacBook completely outclasses the old iBook on all fronts, and even out-performs the MacBook Pro in some cases (due to its slightly faster processor).

    So what's worse? Integrated graphics or an underclocked Radeon X1600?

    Nonetheless, the MacBook looks great, and I can't help but feel sorry for the people who rushed out and got a MacBook Pro. It seems that Apple rushed the Pro out of the door, whereas they took their time with the MacBook and got it right.

    --
    ENDUT! HOCH HECH!
  2. Conclusion by Espectr0 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Pros:
    • widescreen display
    • Nice screen resolution
    • Improved graphics over iBook G4
    • Glossy screen is nice in some situations
    • MagSafe
    • Integrated iSight
    • Affordable
    • Enhanced track pad operation
    • Dramatic performance increase
    • No latch!
    • Super easy to service (hard drive too!)
    • Front Row and remote control

    Cons:
    • High operating temperatures (Almost 85 degrees!)
    • Glossy screen can be annoying under certain circumstances (i.e., with any direct lighting)
    • Integrated graphics siphon off system RAM, slower than dedicated graphics card


    I wonder what hard drives they use. My powerbook's hard drive died in just a little over 2 years. Between whine noises, power adapters that fall away too easily, notebook latches that don't close properly, logic board issues, overheating, display glitches, dead hard drives and more, i think that apple
    hardware is just as error-prone as regular pc hardware.
  3. my thoughts on the heat by cbc1920 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have a new Macbook pro, and yes, it does get hot. As for the thermal paste, 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. As soon as my warrenty expires, you can guarantee I will be in there redoing it myself.
    On the other hand, I notice that my laptop's fan NEVER comes on, as long as I'm not in the hot sun. It seems that with the aluminum case, they have the luxury of using the back half of the laptop as a giant heat exchanger. Heat radiation is proportional to the difference in temperature between the air and the heatsink, so the high temperatures just mean that Apple has decided that having a quiet laptop was more important than a cool one.
    My friends all have Dells and Sonys. Yes, they run cooler, but their fans are almost ALWAYS on, and if they run any more than the basics, they start to sound like a leaf blower.
    Bottom line- with all my past laptops, I have had underclock them in order to keep the fans off, since that seems to be the first component to fail. I can put up with a hot computer, as long as it is quiet and lasts longer.
    A final note- my processor has a full blown whine, but it is easily quited with the well-known quietMBP program. I hope someone comes up with a more elegant solution.

  4. Re:GMA950 graphics, bah! by MBCook · · Score: 5, Interesting
    That's interesting. I went to Dell and configured a laptop to match the Macbook. It was an Inspiron 6400. Same processor, same memory, same graphics, same wireless, same size hard drive, none of the great Apple software. The display is 15".

    $1487.

    An equivalent Macbook (the lowest one) is $1099. Add in $200 for Applecare and the Macbook is still cheaper. Plus the Dell is 50% thicker. It also weighs 16% more.

    An Inspiron 640m 14" notebook configured to be the same as the Macbook is $1457. Still $200 more and you don't get all that great software (OS X and iLife). It weighs the same, but is still 50% thicker.

    What a 12" screen? You'll need a Inspiron 710m. But that means a 1.7 GHz Pentium M. Matching things the best I can otherwise (CD-RW only, no DVD reader or burner) it costs... $1658. That's $400 more than the Macbook. It weighs one pound less than the 13" MacBook but... it's STILL 50% THICKER.

    The Macbook is a great deal. You say you configured a cheaper Dell... can you provide the model? I'd like to see for myself.

    --
    Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
  5. Re:Integrated graphics are for entry level machine by NetFu · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What, like a Walkman?

    It's funny how the original post is reflective of how ubiquitous the iPod has become. I'll throw in my own anecdote:

    I fly about 15 times a year for business. In the last 6 months, out of about 8 flights, only 1 has told the passengers they can now turn on/off their "portable electronic devices". The rest of them told us we could now turn on/off our "iPods and other portable electronic devices". It didn't even occur to me until maybe a half hour after the first time I heard it. They just assumed most of us who had small electronic devices had iPods.

    The fact is, most people won't even consider iPod alternatives. The reasons are varied, but for me it's because I've owned 4 MP3 players, including one Creative, before the two iPods I've bought (one is 3rd generation, and the latest is 5th generation), and every one of them sucked for a handful of reasons. Each one sucked for a different set of reasons, but they all sucked for more than one or two reasons.

    I just got tired of wasting my money on "iPod alternatives", so I don't even consider them any more. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

    On the integrated graphics, I think the MacBook has the same integrated video the Mac Mini has, which I've been using for about a month. I've tested dozens of apps in Mac OS X and Windows on my Mac Mini, and the integrated graphics performed WAY better than I expected. The only recent game I had any problem running because of the graphics was Doom 3. Half Life 2, World of Warcraft (Win and Mac) both ran comparable to my Powerbook with ATI Radeon 9700 and my AMD desktop with NVidia 6800GT.

    We use Solidworks for engineering our products at work, and I showed one of our engineers how it ran on the Mac Mini in Windows XP with a very complex 400mb model, and we were both quite impressed. Especially considering it's an $800 computer, and he needs a $2500 computer to get noticeably better 3D video performance ($750 of that is a high-end workstation card).

    Anyway, the point is, don't just write it off because it's integrated video. Not all integrated video is created equal...