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.'"
and Jobs said, "let them eat paste!"
I went and checked out the 13.3" Macbook in black with the matte finish today. I think that it will hold up as well as the aluminum. (All the iBooks I have seen scratch like crazy) The keyboard is nice, and I would say it's neither better nor worse than that of my 12" PowerBook. I think it's a little crazy to charge an extra $150 for a black versus white finish... However, market demands it... I even bought a black iPod.
After getting my hands on it, I think I will eventually buy a black one. But still...
I wish that they had a 13.3 Pro coming out with a matte screen, backlit keyboard, and the extra little perks that the 15 and 17 Pro's have... But that would probably end up costing as much as the 15...
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!
Last thing ars needs is threats from Apple Legal.
Funnily enough, the specifications for the laptop say that it can get very hot and to avoid burns and irritation the MacBook and MacBook Pro should be used on a desk or another surface. But if you primarily use it on a desk does that make it a desktop?
If the PowerBook became the MacBook Pro, what's the Power Mac going to become?
Mac Mac Pro?
Keep your eyes to the sky.
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
If the PowerBook became the MacBook Pro, what's the Power Mac going to become?
Double Big Mac.
Cons:
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.
Open Source Java Web Forum with LDAP authentication
You could always, you know, buy a not-iPod.
Just a thought.
Haida Manga
I spent a couple minutes checking out the MacBook at my local Apple store.. It looks good. I think it will do well at that price point.
But, I did not like the keyboard. Compared to the keyboard on my PowerBook, or the MacBook Pro's, it didn't feel nearly as good. Maybe it's something you could get used to. But, I really like the old PowerBook keyboard..
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
It has 20 additional gigabytes of hard drive space compared to the model that costs $200 less. Plus the hard drive is easy to replace (according to the article.) Upgrade the mid-range model to the same specs on Apple store and it is *still* $150 more for the black one.
Bottom line is you are paying $200 for the color, or lack thereof.
I still want one bad, but 82 degrees C is way to hot for my lap. I can believe he didn't mention the temperature as a con at the end, I agree with his conclusion earlier in the article that a laptop that runs that hot is defective.
Karma: Incomprehensible (Mostly affected by posting at +5, reading at -1, and metamoderating everything unfair.)
Yeah, right. Not even the Dells in this price range have separate graphics cards. Good luck finding a 2Ghz dual-core laptop for a grand or so without integrated graphics. Hell, good luck finding a 2GHz dual-core laptop in this price range, period. To get the equivalent from Dell, you have to get a high-end Inspiron, and that'll set you back more than $1500. Of course, with that you'll get a 17" screen, which is cool, but if you want to stick close to the $1200 price point, you'll have to settle for a 1.66GHz Core Duo.
Just junk food for thought...
"Apple then introduced the nanos (which had even smaller hard drives) to replace the minis"
The nanos don't have hard drives, they have flash memory, which is still more expensive per gig than hard drives, but much smaller, and solid state. Which is why they could make them that size.
Has anyone else noticed that the Powerbooks/iBooks have gone the way of the dodo? Also, at the beginning of the Core Duo age they were still selling the iMac G5's along with the iMac Core Duo's, but now it's just the Core Duo. Same with the Mac Mini. As for all the Apple notebooks now being widescreen, I don't know about everyone else, but I'm going to miss the good old days of non-widescreen notebooks. I don't know why, but a good old non-widescreen still has much more appeal to me than a widescreen of the same size.
This is not a sig. This is a llama-duck. Quack.
I'm sure it's already been stated, but here goes anyway.
With a GPU, the Macbook would DESTROY the sales of the Macbook Pro. Once Intel comes out with the C2D, that chip will go into the Macbook Pro, and then there will be enough of a difference to allow big boy graphics in the Macbook. Then again, apparently Intel's next IG, the 965, will not suck AS bad and might suffice for basic 3-D use.
Prof. Farnsworth - "Oh a lesson in not changing history from Mr I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!"
OK, but it still has only integrated graphics.
It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
The general explanation I've heard is that Apple is pricing the black model higher to try and control demand for it, since they apparently realize that if they made the black version the same price, they would have trouble meeting demand. I guess the question would be "why not just make more black macbooks?", but presumably there is some reason or some difficulty with making the black version (which apparently is not the same kind of glossy surface as the white ones).
That's a pretty stupid question. The builtin chipset used sucks; it uses system ram, for starters. That is -really- going to hurt when you're mucking about in Aperture or iPhoto, or go to play a video and the whole system becomes slow as a dog.
Here's a test: why don't you try running Quake 4 at 1280x1024 or higher and tell me how well it works for you. Works FANTASTIC on the MBP (it was a little laggy sometimes, but they've since updated it to be SMP and it FLIES.)
Test number two: try playing the high-definition (1080i) trailers on Apple's website. I'd be absolutely shocked if it manages to do it without dropping frames like crazy. My Macbook Pro barely breaks a sweat.
Nonetheless, the MacBook looks great, and I can't help but feel sorry for the people who rushed out and got a MacBook Pro.
I don't feel sorry for myself or anyone else who bought a MacBook Pro, but I did get a developer discount. The MacBook Pro doesn't have any major faults; I hate the name with a passion, it makes some noises it shouldn't (slightly better after the recent firmware update) and I would have greatly preferred the 15" G4 screen's extra vertical pixels over the blurry, narcissistic iSight...but the thing works just goddamn fine.
I got my money's worth, I assure you. I was surprised at how "Pro" the non-Pro was (and Ars severely underplays the graphics and display differences; a lot of people hate glossy screens and the integrated graphics truly do suck), but whatever. I can't wait for all the "waaah, my graphics really really suck, I thought I was getting a MacBook Pro, how come I can't play any games and all the i-apps are slow as shit" comments over the next few weeks from "early adopters" of the Macbook...
Please help metamoderate.
"Hell, good luck finding a 2GHz dual-core laptop in this price range, period."
The parent to my post was implying that the MacBook was a good deal.
So, Dell:
$1229
White MacBook with same specs:
$1549
Black MacBook with same specs:
$1699
The world moves for love. It kneels before it in awe.
I was really glad to read about how easy it is to replace the HD.
Some of you might also find this interesting: step-by-step take apart. Text is in Japanese, but fortunately the pictures are in English. =) Click on the left hand picture. Looks like the whole unit is much easier to disassemble than were previous 'books.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
That gap existed because those were the kinds of hard drives that were available, 6 gig 1 inch drives and 20/40 gig 1.8 inch drives. I'm not even sure if the 1.8 inch drives are more expensive, i'm guessing they're actually cheaper but less shock resistant. They could use multiple 1 inch drives, but that would end up making the smaller players more expensive than the big ones. Perhaps apple could have used their size to influence drive manufacturers to start making 1.4 inch drives, but that would likely reduce overall efficiency.
a ses/article/0,1121,2973,00.html ), so if you want a 10 gig mp3 player, and especially if you'd like it to be small, you're in luck.
Now we have 8 gig 1 inch drives. Anytime now, seagate is supposed to be producing 1 inch hard drives that use perpendicular recording to have a capacity of 12 gigs( http://www.seagate.com/cda/newsinfo/newsroom/rele
You know, when you think you *only need* 10GB from a music player, they have already won.
My english is sow-sow. Sowhat?
I really hate how Apple uses the so called "Superdrive" as something so special...
What are they gonna do when blu ray burners start becoming standard? Call theirs an ultradrive? Or a megadrive, and get sued by sega?
"laptop" does not appear once in the MacBook's manual."
The term "laptop" went away after the first guy burnt his dick on one.
Then they called them "notebooks".
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.
K maybe I like those types of neat little nuances.
"Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."
Who is "they"? I'm the one making the decision about my needs. No one is telling me what size iPod (or other media player) I need. Apple is marketing a product based on available technologies at relatively fixed price points; if you were paying attention. Apple sets prices and slides newer, faster, bigger (in this case) technologies into them once, a.) the supply margins allow, and b.) when the demand is present in the market. Also, what did they win? If you mean they won by making a superior product at a reasonable price that not only plays music, but can be used as a general purpose storage device, then yeah, they've won 80% of the market. Does it fit everybody's wants and needs? No. Should it? Impossible. That's why there is another 20% market alive.
Weren't we talking about the MacBook? Isn't it designed to be an entry level consumer laptop? Was it ever advertised as a gaming laptop? Does Apple even mention games or gaming in their web or other promotional material relating to the MacBook? Ok, one on the Tech Specs page, "Big Bang Board Games", which I'm guessing is not a severely graphics intensive game experience. Other than that, none. Why are people complaining about a product's gaming performance when it's not advertised as a gaming machine? Aren't computers supposed to be tools and not just toys? Seems strange that the crowd that once called the Mac a 'toy computer' is complaining that it can't play games.
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?
$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.
I go to Dell and check out the same model...
2 GHz Core Duo, 1 Gig of RAM, XP Pro, 100 Gig 7200 RPM drive, glossy screen, you're looking at $1746 shipped.
The price YOU quoted was for 1.66 GHz, XP Media Center, 5400 RPM drive, non-glossy screen.
By the way, both prices are after a 22% SALE that Dell is holding. I know they're always holding some sale or another, but even with the sale your price is flat out wrong for the specs you quoted.
This doesn't include all the great software that OS X comes with like iLife, iWork, and more. Also, the Dell is 50% thicker than the Mac. The video out is VGA only (not DVI). On the plus side, you do get the 5-in-1 media card reader (I'm still surprised Apple hasn't done this yet with all the media stuff they push).
If I make a white Macbook match the Dell (by upping the RAM, the hard drive, and adding Apple Care)... it costs $1798.
Ladies and gentlemen, the Macintosh premium: $52
That's 3%.
I'd GLADLY pay $52 to get OS X, iLife, and a laptop that isn't 50% thicker.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
I'm not sure I follow you...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Alright, it seems that this is a great upgrade for people coming from a 12" iBook.
I, however, am looking for an upgrade for my 12" Powerbook G4. And this ain't it.
First of all, the glossy screen. I guess we've got that confirmed now. I hate those. As the Ars review mentions, that's not a feature 'professionals' want. I certainly don't.
Quite a few of the new features - display spanning, for example - are NOT a new feature for me. My 12" Powerbook can already do that.
I'm not sure about the keyboard... I'll have to go play with that at an Apple store or something.
Now, I would NOT pay $150 for a black case. I would, however, HAPPILY pay an extra $150 for a non-glossy screen. I will never buy a laptop with a glossy screen.
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is kinky.
Was it playing at its full framerate though? If you press Command-I while the video is playing, it'll bring up an informational window that will show the file's framerate, and the rate that it's actually playing at. Quicktime will drop the framerate before it actually starts to studder, so something can look fairly smooth (if you're not looking closely) but on closer inspection might only be playing at 15 or 20 fps.
Not saying that's what's happening, but "it looks good" can be misleading if you're trying to get a benchmark.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
I really like Apple laptops. Great quality, performant hardware, and NOT expensive. However I have never bought a single Apple laptop. And you know why ? Because they don't make ultraportable laptops, and, oh boy, I wish they would ! The lighter Apple laptop is the MacBook at 5.2 pounds (2.36 kg). For comparison purpose my current ultraportable, a Panasonic R3 stands at 2.2 pounds (990 g !). Wouldn't that be cool a 2.2 pounds Apple laptop ?
[sarcasm]And you're going to browse the internet/chat online/write a paper/view your digital pictures/watch a movie on a laptop with a 13.3" screen?[/sarcasm]
Why would screensize be the main argument against purchasing a laptop? Small size usually = mobility, which is sorta the point with laptops.
LegendMUD
I find it funny when people spend time reading through all the /. comments of each story ... but never read the story itself. It boggles the mind, it does.
Yeah, I picked up a few after I ran out of internal monitor bays in my case. They're more convenient, yeah, but usually more expensive than their internal counterparts.
LegendMUD
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!
Actually, that's just basic sales. Suppose you've got someone who wants to by a widget. Not an Acme Widget, but just any widget, and they've settled on Acme. But if an Acme Widget fanboi walks in off the street and tells the customer that there's going to be a new version released next week, then the customer might well decide to wait until Widget 2.0 comes out and get that one instead. While they're waiting for 2.0 to come out, they might go to Acme's competitor and get one of theirs. You've lost that sale.
And this is just stuff I gleaned while selling luggage at my local department store.
AC's modded -6. I don't see you, I don't mod you, anything you say is lost. Don't like it? Don't be a coward.
I'm a bit confused.. when I goto Apple and select the 2.0Ghz version, I notice that the 2GB is $500 more.. but at pricewatch .. they are only $166 for 2GB... is Apple jacking up the price that much?
Their standards don't go out the window - its a budget, integrated circuit doing what it is designed to do... 2D and basic 3D acceleration at minimal cost. As the review said, (oops, I admitted that I read it. so embarassing!) it can still run fairly complex games under reduced settings.
Having said that, I am disappointed that I'd have to drop another $700 for a Radeon 1600 (in the MacBook Pro, which is actually slower!). Not gonna go there.
Jeremy
The argument I am constantly having with myself is:
"I want a laptop... OSX is so well designed and elegant, and I can't wait to learn Cocoa and objC and do some development for it. But I really wish I could play Civ4 between classes. Maybe Windows isn't sooo bad..."
So you can see why a dual-boot option looks pretty damn good. I will be shelling out for a new MacBook in the next few weeks.
Jeremy
I have the last g4 powerbook and ibook as well as the last g3 color ibook. Both the g4s have the airport card which does b/g, and the color ibook only does b. All of them connect flawlessly using WPA to a basic consumer Netgear wireless router and also to a wrt54g (version 2 I think). A while back before my Siemens Speedstream died, I had some issue with WEP which was solved by prepending "$" to the WEP key when entering it into the mac.
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
The GMA950 is free, it comes with the system chipset. It's hard to get any cheaper than that. A dedicated video chipset would probably add significant (relative) cost to the manufacturing of the i^HMacBook, as it would require additional system board real estate, cooling allowances and the chips (GPU and RAM) themselves.
With that said, I was very disappointed there wasn't a "high end" MacBook with dedicated video to serve as a 12" PB replacement. My initial thoughts were that the black MacBook would fill this niche and that's why it was US$150 more (and a different colour), but closer examination revealed it was just a cynical money-grab.
Intel's usual quality and performance standards go out the window when it comes to their graphics chips.
No, they're simply not *meant* to be anything more than a very basic video card. You're saying because a Honda Civic can't outrun a Nissan Skyline, Honda's "usual quality and performance standards go out the window".
Economically speaking, every retail version of OS X is an upgrade.
You can wipe the drive completely and do a clean install of OS X from any retail version. Upgrades require that you have a previous version of the operating system already on your drive. Sure, if you get a Macintosh you already have a previous version, but if ever something happens like a hard drive crash, you can just do a clean install. Windows upgrades require you install the previous version first then the upgrade in circumstances like that, or else use a full installation version.
This one is interesting too:
k _makes_major_leap_forwa.html
http://www.oreillynet.com/mac/blog/2006/05/macboo
A video to show how easy it is to to get to the RAM chips and hard disk.
JP
Slashdot posts yet another Apple story, and they again get hammered with a bunch of people configuring pimped Dell's but never buying them.
You know what?
Perhaps because a lot of people don't need a powerful GPU? I do audio & music with my computer. A fast CPU is crucial, and the GPU doesn't matter at all. Same is true even for most 2D graphics & video work. 3D graphics and games are the main things that benefit from a nice GPU. Sure, many 2D gfx filters could be offloaded (like CoreImage does), but most apps aren't coded that way. Me, I'll take the digital audio input & output (first time the consumer lappy has had audio input of ANY kind, nice!) over a fancy GPU any day.
The point is that people who think the MacBook is cheap are clearly not shopping around. If Dell are more expensive right now, perhaps it has something to do with the relatively short period of time the Core Duo has been available on the market. I expect a lot of manufacturers are trying to shift their existing stock out of the way. Hence, a Core Duo costs a lot on Dell but you can find a perfectly acceptable laptop with an "inferior" chip for far less.
I'd argue that the Core Duo is a waste of time in most laptops (of any kind) if they're going to be crippled with a crappy integrated graphics chip or slow hard drive. If you can't play games, then what is the point of stuffing a fast dual core CPU in there?
sehryan got THAT number by choosing a base model and adding only the stuff he/she thought was needed to be comparable to the MacBook's specs. You chose a premium model, which has some non-removable features not found in the base model (or the MacBook), then you added some unnecessary features (not found in the MacBook) to make the Dell even more expensive. You also didn't mention some important features about the Dell that counters some of the MacBook "advantages" you touted. It almost looks like you did this on purpose, but I'm sure you didn't. That would be lame. You probably just rushed the configuration.
I think you needlessly added $116 to the Dell's price by choosing Windows XP Professional over the default XP Media Center Edition. For the vast majority of buyers considering a MacBook (not "Pro") or Inspiron (from Dell's "Home & Home Office" store), XP MCE is the more appropriate OS choice. XP MCE adds more media features to XP than Front Row adds to OS X. XP MCE cannot join an Active Directory domain like XP Pro can, but how many Inspiron/MacBook buyers need this? XP MCE still has most XP Pro features like Remote Desktop and Encrypting File System.
The MacBook has a 5400rpm hard drive, but you chose a 100GB 7200rpm hard drive on the Dell (for $137 more) when the a cheaper 100GB 5400rpm drive was available.
You chose the "glossy screen" for the Dell (many users hate the glare), but you failed to mention this screen also has a higher resolution than the MacBook (1440x900 vs 1280x800). This only added $39 to the Dell, but the higher resolution should have been mentioned for a fair comparison... and not everyone wants glossy and glarey.
iWork is a 30-day trial version. You also didn't mention that the Dell you configured includes Microsoft Works Suite, which includes Word 2002 (from Office XP), Works 8 (includes an iCal-comparable calendar), Money 2006, Digital Image Standard 2006 (iPhoto), Encarta Encyclopedia 2006, and Streets & Trips Essentials. The "premium" Dell that you chose also comes bundled with non-free (and non-removable) software like Sonic MyDVD Plus (iDVD), Corel PhotoAlbum Premium (iPhoto again), MusicMatch Plus (useless iTunes competitor), and a useless (but non-free) 2-year subscription to McAfee Security Center (VirusScan, Firewall, Spyware Removal).
That leaves the Dell with inadequate free or bundled competitors to iMovie HD (Movie Maker 2 can't measure up) and GarageBand, but the Dell does give you some decent software that the MacBook doesn't like Word, Money, and Streets & Trips. I've read that iWeb 1.0 is a buggy pile of crap, but it will get better. Free Windows alternatives exist.
TO START
PRESS ANY KEY
Where's the 'ANY' key? I see Esk, Kitarl, and Pig-Up...
It's a different material -- the black plastic is stiffer.
To verify this yourself, go in to an Apple store, or Apple Authorized Reseller, where both are on display. Try torquing the screens on each unit a bit. Gently. Don't get thrown out of the store for ripping the screen off the hinges -- although that would be difficult given it seems to be on there pretty tightly.
Also press against the back of the display. You'll see the LCD's colors change as you press with light to moderate force on the back of the white Macbook's display, but you'll have to pres much harder on the black Macbook to get the same effect. The color change demonstrates that you're stressing the LCD panel itself. Unfortunately, LCD panels really can't be strained very far without failure, so the implication is that the black unit's display is better protected from damage coming from behind.
I do suspect the pricing is largely an attempt to control demand for the black unit, but as trivia, it's clear the two units use different case materials.
And hey! Don't forget those extra 20GB of hard drive space! Isn't that alone worth the extra $150, especially given the price of hard drive upgrades, and all three of those tedious confusing steps to install...yeah, ok, maybe not.
I predict the prices for similarly spec'd white and black units will even out within four months.
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...
Ok let's try this:
Macbook:
2Ghz dual core
Mac OS X
13.3 inch display (remember not everyone wants a 15 inch screen)
512 MB 667 MHz (2 DIMMs)
60 GB SATA HDD 5400 RPM
DVD±RW/CD±RW Dual Layer
GMA950 64MB memory (shared)
iSight
Firewire/USB2.0
DVI out
digital audio in and out
802.11g and bluetooth
55WHr battery
5.2 lbs
To add to the specs that you provided the dell also weighs 6.18 lbs assuming a 6 cell battery and a DVD combo drive so we can add more weight for the battery you chose, it also has a media card reader (not in the macbook) but only comes with 10/100 ethernet and no bluetooth. The does not appear to be audio in, but perhaps I'm missing it.
Now to do what you did:
2x 1 gig DIMMs for mackbook at pricewatch $166
We'll use your HDD $143.38
sell 512 RAM: figure since it's SO DIMMS and 256s maybe about -$40
sell 60 GB 5400 RPM SATA: the best price I can find is an ebay buy it now for 260 so figure maybe -$150
So macbook is now: $1418
Your computer has a larger screen, a media reader, a better graphics card and a larger capacity battery (batttery life is another matter).
Mine is smaller and lighter, has gigabit ethernet, bluetooth, audio in and an iSight
Both come with a 1 year waranty
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
from the Apple Support site: "If you have a MacBook, the Final Cut Studio (Universal) crossgrade Installer does not prohibit you from installing the pro applications, but this configuration does not meet the minimum system requirements for Final Cut Studio. See the Final Cut Studio system requirements for complete requirements. Note: The integrated graphics processor in the MacBook does not permit float processing in Motion and will result in degraded performance and other issues in Motion and other Final Cut Studio applications." http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=303 782
I'm not quite sure why you think the Mini is targeting a much different market to the MacBook.
Did you catch the "reluctantly" bit in there?
I'm talking about Apple apologists who beable on slashdot about how the crappy video in the Mini is OK because it's "targeted for a different market".
Not to mention, everything running OS X is running 3D, not 2D.
There is absolutely no T&L or any other advanced 3d required by the OSX user interface. It's all throwing around scaled 2d bitmaps in a 2d plane with fake shadows done by layering 2d shadow bitmaps at the edge of the window. It's no more "3d" than Windows NT 4.0 or X11 with Motif... it's a 3d look using 2d bitmap operations.
None of its contemporaries are.
I'm seeing a number of sub-1000 notebooks with Radeon chipsets.
Games are - in the realm of non-professional software - the most hardware-intensive software the average person will ever use. Why on earth would anyone think a low-end general-purpose computer would be capable of running such high-end, specific software well?
I didn't say "well", I said "better than barely adequately".
And I said "better than barely adequately" rather than "even barely adequately" because the post I was responding to described it as being barely adequate. I wouldn't use that phrase to describe the existing iBook's performance... I'd have called it "embarassingly bad" or even "unacceptable"... but if that's what you call "barely adequate" then I want more than what you consider "barely adequate".
The GPU on the Macbook Pro isn't a "gamer chip" either, but it's adequate.
I accepted the horrible performance of the iBook and Powerbook because they had an excuse... the low speed memory bus on the G4. Once that bottleneck was gone, they should be able to do at least do as well as other entry level computers with low-end-but-acceptable chipsets like the nVidia go5200.
So now instead of being crippled by the 166 MHz bus, they're crippled by the Intel GMA950. They're still crippled.
It's like buying a Honda Civic and then complaining that it sucks on the racetrack.
No, it's like buying a Honda Civic and discovering it can't accelerate to freeway speed by the end of the on-ramp.
If you want to play games, either buy a computer meant for playing games, or buy one high-end enough that it can play games as a side effect.
Most of the OpenGL apps I'm interested in aren't actually games, but they run acceptably fast on any machine with any GPU that actually implements a full set of 3d shaders. That is, anything that doesn't actually suck at games. I was hoping that the higher speed bus on the Intel Core would mean Apple was finally going to ship machines that were comparable to the better entry level (under $500) PCs or (under $1000) laptops. What a fool I was. Apple still thinks that anyone who isn't interested in forking over $2000 at the drop of a hat doesn't matter.