Slashdot Mirror
New MacBook Dual Core 2 Benchmarks
ApolloX writes "New Macbook Pro Benchmarks are now available. From the article:
'Like the iMac before it, Apple's MacBook Pro underwent an upgrade highlighted by a chip swap — the Core Duo processor that used to power Apple's pro laptop is gone, replaced by the next-generation Core 2 Duo. And as with our iMac benchmarks, these updated Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro models show a modest performance gain when compared to older systems running on Core Duo chips with the same clock speeds.'
As expected, the new 15-inch Intel Dual Core 2 (2.33Ghz/2GB RAM) is the new king of Apple portables, with results for the 17-inch model still pending."
What's with the headline? It's "MacBook Pro", not MacBook. They're separate products. And it's "Core 2 Duo". Would it have been that hard to identify the correct product being reviewed?
This
macbooks are too expensive for me to buy one, if they ever come down in price that would be great.But right now you can buy a pc with the same config cheaper.
You know you have too much free time when you enjoy reading about in how many seconds files get unzipped :|
I'm more interested in how hot these things run.. my old Core Duo MBP runs so hot I can't even use it on my lap, and the fan emits a really annoying loud, high-pitched whine. This computer is actually physically painful to use.
The performance gains are modest. But even with performance increase, there's a modest gain in cooling. I wonder if there are any gains in power consumption or increased battery life. Anyone know?
Faster chip brings faster performance!
I was excited to see the headline. I look at the site and its just comparing several models to a baseline previous MacBook Pro. What is the point in that? I want to see real benchmarks like perhaps windows running on it vs a comparable "PC" laptop from say dell, toshiba or some other vendor. I'd also like to see a benchmark compared to desktop models like iMacs, Mac Pros, etc. To put it in perspective, maybe some benchmarks from G4/G5 models as well.
:)
I want to know how apple compares to other vendors now that apples to apples comparisons are more fair. You could argue driver support if the mac loses, but its not like dell ships great drivers for their modified chipsets either. I have an iBook now and it would be nice to know how PC operating systems run on this thing. I now have a good reason to want to run BSD on one of these
MidnightBSD: The BSD for Everyone
Who DOESN'T like a weenie roast?
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
As someone that maintains Macbooks and other Mac laptops I'd say that the quality control isn't good. This week a 14-month old 17" G4 went down with a motherboard problem - it's essentially a write off due to the massive price of a new board. Happens all the time. All I say to people is make sure you buy the AppleCare extended warranty, it's expensive but in the majority of cases worth it. However I think this advice applies to most laptops not Apple in general. It's also why I don't bother owning one anymore - an Apple desktop will last for 5-10 years with no problems - but it's a nightmare to lug about ;-)
spoonerize "magic trackpad"
Performance of 2.33 GHz model with 1 and 2 GB of RAM is almost same. why does doubling of RAM is not increasing the performance?.. but it sure does increase the price
15-inch MacBook Pro/2.33GHz Intel Core 2 Duo (2GB RAM) 226 1:10 0:57 2:07 0:51 0:58 72.9 2:22 15-inch MacBook Pro/2.33GHz Intel Core 2 Duo (1GB RAM) 222 1:11 0:57 2:07 0:51 0:58 72.1 2:39
Faster and cooler and less power is not the point.
The point is that core 2 is a 64-bit processor. Core 1 was only a 32-bit processor. That may not matter for Joe Web Surfer, but it represents a significant limit on the future of Core 1 machines.
(Core 2 also supports the nx bit, which is hardly a panacea, but has its place in an overall security strategy. Without it, memory tricks have to be used that end up costing performance. Usually not very much, but some.)
I'm getting tired of seeing all these bullshit, tomshardware-like Apple stories. Does anybody have an idea about what I can do to get Appledot stories all up out of my grill when I go to the main page? I've thought about going to, for example, politics.slashdot.org, games.slashdot.org, etc. individually, but I don't want to miss a story of value that is not in any one individual category. Any ideas? Anyone? Bueller?
It also gained dual-layer Superdrives and Firewire 800 back, and comes with more RAM standard and higher maximum RAM than the previous model, which is more than you can say for the iMac upgrade.
This is a stale argument, you could certainly build a PC cheaper but I doubt you could buy a comparable OEM PC any cheaper than an iMac. When people compare apples to Apples (pun proudly intended) properly the Apple is at least equal to if not lower in price. Take a Dell XPS 200 and compare it to the 20" iMac or an HP S7600Y against a Mac mini Core Duo, factor in iLife and OS X and there is little room for debate.
I do not know about the rest of you, but when I am looking at benchmarks I'm interested in how the computer performs in relation to the one that I have now and not to the previous almost similar model. Is it worth the cost to buy a new computer? Will I gain anything? Everyone already knows each new computer is slightly better than the last. The only one these number will mean anything too are people that recently bought a MacBook Pro and they are not likely to buy another one right now anyway.
No matter how much you pay for a PC. You'll never get OSX. Its worth it for that alone. Your original point is irrelevant anyway since there isn't an exact equivalent PC when comparing one to a mac.
Jonathanjk.com
And if Apple charged the same as Microsoft for similar OS product, then you're not going to save any money.
``if someone could get a legit version of OSX running on a PC''
Not going to happen. The license of OS X forbids it running on non-Apple hardware.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
Anybody know what sort of battery life to expect out of these machines? I love how my iBook gets over 5 hours of use from one battery charge, but I think the MacBook and MacBook Pro don't do that well. However, the Core 2 is supposed to be more efficient than the Core. So, perhaps the battery life on these new machines can impress me?
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
seriously, if you are not just trying to start a flame war, i wonder if it is just the abundance of people's complaints being heard louder than before. i only one Apple portable (an ibook) that's worked flawlessly for the last 5 years. i have never had a serious issue with my desktops (going back to before the Macintosh). out of people i directly know with Apple computers, nobody has had a serious issue that Apple did not resolve in a decent way. i know somebody that knows somebody that had some terrible story about tech support or some wonky product, but nobody i personally know. even people i know that run out an buy Rev A products seem to do fine.
i'm typing this on a core 2 duo iMac, and while this basic form factor goes back to the G5 iMac, it is slightly revised when they popped in the CPU upgrade. no problems here. my iPods have worked a-ok. my G4 tower is 6.5 years old and it still chugs along. i also work in an university edu environment that is 100 percent Mac and we have not had any significant Mac failures in the last 14 years that i have been there. i think about 10 years ago we have a power supply go bad on a machine under 2 years old. that's really about it. it really makes me wonder if you just hear more about people's issues. is it law firms hoping for class action cases? just angry consumers with a lot of bottled up anger? i have no idea. no matter what it is, i have not been scared off of Apple hardware. because of the university setting (a radio station) i have sworn off a lot of manufacturers of audio gear, but nothing like that with Macs.
i guess there are no actual statistics available for how many people have issues, just some survey over consumer satisfaction?
I picked up a 2.33 GHz MBP (US$2500) a couple of days ago and it meets my expectations. No problems with noise or heat issues, and the build quality and design is much better than the offerings back in 2002 when I bought an iBook 700 MHz G3 and a PB 800 MHz G4. The magnetic power connector by itself is a big improvement.
The included printed documentation is rather lacking for a notebook in this price range. Additionally, there in no recordable CD or DVD included. And as noted before, there is no modem either. For developers, both X Window and Xcode require additional installation steps.
For those who can accept a sligntly slower CPU and half the memory (128 MB vs 256 MB) graphics, a savings of US$500 can be had by getting the base model and using the cash to upgrade the main memory from 1 GB to 2 GB (or 3 GB).
This headline does more than suggest, it actually states, that the system under benchmark has two Core 2 processors. That would be a total of four processing cores spread over two chips, and quite a burden on the poor system's batteries.
WRONG! What it has is a Core 2 Duo dual-processor chip.
It's bad enough the the submitter can't properly write the headline. That the Slashdot editor let it through in this form deserves having him (or her) sent back to Remedial English, and not allowed near a keyboard until they pass it.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Someone asked about temperature. At its hottest I can still have it on my lap (wearing pants, dunno if it's cool enough to Quake nekkid or anytihng). Most of the time it runs cool. It's fast and snappy. It rules.
Most annoying part is that I had to recompile all the open source things I'd built for my previous ppc machine. Apparently the emulator doesn't work for command line things.
Start Running Better Polls
Macs don't cost more than equivalent PCs. In fact, the Mac Pro and MacBook Pro are thousands less than their Dell equivalents.
"Sufferin' succotash."
All Apple has to do is unbundle their hardware/software, price the MacBook at a comparable cost to the PC, and price OSX at the difference between the current cost and the hardware only cost. You'd still pay the same overall, yet get your hardware at Dell/HP/IBM prices. Would that make you happier?
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
I've been following some debate on Macintouch about whether or not to consider this a 64-bit laptop. Apparently the processor is but the memory bus isn't. Or something.
What's the real deal as far as compatibility w/64-bit Leopard goes?
The only thing more pathetic than a PC user is a PC user trying to be a Mac user. We have a name for you people: switcheurs.
There's a good reason for your vexation at the Mac's holistic approach to platform design: You don't speak its language. Remember that the Mac was designed by artists, for artists, be they poets, musicians, or avant-garde mathematicians. A shiny new Mac can introduce your frathouse hovel to a modicum of good taste, but it can't make Mac users out of dweebs and squares like you.
So don't force what doesn't come naturally. You'll be much happier if you stick to an OS that matches your personality. And you'll be doing the rest of us a favor, too; you leave Macs to Mac users, and we'll leave beige to you.
Macs are now like ANY OTHER SYSTEM. Benchmarking them is pointless.
I'm tired of this argument. If you want to pay more for a Mac, that's fine, but don't say you can't get a good PC for cheaper. It's just not true. The only Mac you can come close to arguing that with is the desktop Mac Pro, since they are workstation processors that Intel must be giving Apple a significant price break on. Just configured a thinkpad with better graphics, higher resolution display, wireless n integrated, $200 cheaper. And Thinkpads are not considered cheap notebooks. You can get it $2000 if you wait for a sale. Perhaps you think the little camera is worth over $200? ThinkPad Z61e 9450GBU $2,303.00 Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo T7600 (2.33GHz, 4MB L2, 667MHz FSB) (Standard) 1 Operating system: Microsoft Windows XP Professional 41U3118 1 Display type: 15.4 inch WUXGA TFT (1920x1200) (Standard) 1 Memory: 1GB PC2-5300 CL5 NP DDR2 SDRAM SODIMM 2 Graphics: 256MB ATI Mobility FireGL V5200 (Standard) 1 Ports: 3 USB 2.0, IEEE 1394, 3-1 digital media reader (SD/MMC/MS), S-Video out, External Display, External Microphone/Line-In, Headphone / Line out (Standard), Hard drive: 120GB 5400rpm SATA Hard Drive, Optical device: 8x Max DVD Recordable Ultrabay Enhanced Drive, Integrated communication: 56K V.92 Designed Modem (Standard), Integrated Ethernet: Integrated Gigabit Ethernet (Standard), Integrated WiFi wireless LAN: Wi-Fi wireless upgradable and Bluetooth (Standard), Integrated WiFi wireless LAN adapters: ThinkPad 11a/b/g/n Wi-Fi, Security: Client Security Solution and Integrated fingerprint reader (Standard)
(Sorry this turned out long. You can skim large paragraphs tho, except the first.)
"Apples" to apples is only relevant if one is considering the smaller set of OEM computers. Those who are like myself who builds his own computer does so to get a cheaper price and to allocate my money to specific quality parts and away from others (eg. spend $100CAD less on the video card and get nicer ram or the better Core 2 Duo). (I don't care much about overclocking and the act of putting things together.) But if I knew what OS X were like, I might want to get an Apple system for it, and I would hope they do choose quality parts given they are called "Premium" so often.
So let's see what Apple offers at $1700 (dual core, 2x1GB fast ram, and high-end video card, expandability): The closest Mac Pro was $2600. But I had to go for the cheaper ram than what I wanted for price, and was forced to spend money on PC5300 instead of my choice of PC4200 (could be getting a deal there tho). I was forced to buy a second CPU so I got the cheapest one, again to help the price; I would guess the Xeon's are more expensive than the Core 2 Duo I wanted, but I couldn't find the price quickly so ignore this. I was forced to buy a hard-drive--I have one already at home. The video card isn't quite the one I wanted but I'll ignore that. Like with the hard-drive, I would gut my computer for its DVD writer, but I have to buy one again from Apple. $900 more for something that may be faster in some regards, but isn't even exactly what I want. The case looked to be pretty damn nice though.
So obviously, the Mac Pro is not for me.
The 20" iMac looks to be close feature-wise. In customization I was forced to buy a hdd again, I picked the better cpu which seemed overpriced compared to the prices floating around in my head from yesterdays shopping/research/planning of my next computer. Of course I must be paying more for the LCD I don't want, since I have a 19" CRT at home which is just fine. I couldn't pick the right video card, so I'm stuck paying for one to be replaced. How exactly do you install a video card into this thing though? I guess I'll choose the better but still poor one instead. Oh, and there is roughly zero expandability. OK, it comes to $2400 for a underpowered computer I don't want. $700 more than the one I'm planning to build/buy, which is faster in it seems every regard. Slower to hook up that video cable I suppose.
So obviously, the iMac is not for me.
IIRC, Dell lets you do very extensive customization. When going Apple there isn't much variation you can do. I guess Apple is missing the price-point that I hang out at.
And I don't even know if I would like OS X or not. But it's a bit moot when they don't make a computer for me.
Bullshit. See my other post. Macs do cost more. That's fine, you can make a good argument they should, but they cost more. Comparing it to Dell and then upgrading it with their horribly overpriced upgrades is not a valid argument. Only idiots do that. The Mac Pro IS the one exception, although I can still configure a faster equivalent PC from someplace like Monarch for a little cheaper, (with XP/Vista upgrade instead of OSX). I am guessing that Intel is giving Apple a significant price break on the processors.
They aren't thousands. Remove one zero and you'll be right. Your usually talking $300-$400 less.
That worked like gangbusters, and I also availed myself of the chance to filter out most of the other uninteresting garbage on the site. Seeing that piece of crap article marked the first time I ever felt inspired enough to customize my Slashdot preferences, and for whatever reason, I kept seeing the wrong preferences bar.
I'm posting as AC, because apparently if you have moderation points and are in fact also an asshole, then you abhor the idea of people actually receiving helpful information in the Slashdot forums. And if you are an asshole and DON'T have mod points, then you just can't control yourself and can't pass on the chance to mock others by posting chiding comments. (Hi DDLKermit007!!! "Your" the best!!11! )
Hey, thanks again.
-BeeBeard
Smoking some of that Steve Jobs crack, are you?
Whether it is worth it or not is completely subjective. It might be worth it for you. It's not for me. And yes, I've used OSX enough to decide. The original point is not irrelevant. Why can't you get an equivalent PC? You can certainly get one that is close enough for the differences to be trivial. Even if you couldn't, it wouldn't make the point "irrelevant", just impossible to prove. But you can, so it is (possible to prove, that is). I can configure a more powerful Thinkpad for at least $200 cheaper than a similar Macbook Pro. The Thinkpad doesn't have a camera, but has a higher resolutions screen, better graphics card, Wireless N (if you want it), and most importantly (for me) the pointer-nipple known as Trackpoint. For what I use a notebook for (CAD, finite element post-processing), there is just no comparison. Obviously others find the the Macbook Pro design and OSX superior and thus are quite willing to pay more for less hardware. Not that there's anything wrong with that!
I just got my 2.33 GHz MacBook Pro, no problems whatsoever. The fans are quiet, but very efficient, I guess. I've watched a few movies while crunching some numbers in the background, giving the processor a run for its money, and the bottom has never reached the point where I had to move the computer off of my lap.
The Xeons in the Mac Pro are indeed quite a bit more expensive than the Core 2 Duos. In fact, for $2600 the Mac Pro is a pretty damn good deal. For everything else, I would agree that you can get more hardware for your money elsewhere.
They allow you to install a 1gb and a 2gb stick, but why can't you install 2x 2gb for 4gb???
2.33GHz, 2GB RAM, 160GB HDD. It's scary fast, even in Aperture. After reading horror stories on the web I thought it'd run ridiculously hot. Not so, my friends. The bottom does get hot when you do something hardcore (LiveType realtime rendering or a hardcore Aperture session), but not as hot as to be unbearable. Overall, I'm very pleased with my purchase, and this is hands down the best laptop I've ever used.
:0)
My son is very pleased, too - he can't get enough of Photo Booth.
All yours are stale arguments as well. Force the PC to compare to the mac configuration (an impossible task), place premium value on every difference no matter how slight, then the factor in the subjective value of software differences (that can't be resolved) in favor of the mac and the mac wins every time. It's a fact that if you want to run OS X then mac is your only choice. That doesn't make the mac cheaper.
In this particular example, Apple people will argue that the mini's size is a critical factor yet they won't place any value whatsoever on the superior 3.5" drive or the expandability of the somewhat larger PCs that are compared. They argue that iLife is somehow distinguishing in spite of the fact that the only consistently useful iLife app is free for Windows as well. When all else fails, they argue that no operating system other than OS X is worth having. Why argue at all?
Less hardware? You seem to be missing the Aluminum case, the FW800 port, the iSight camera, the drop-tilt sensors, the ambient lighting sensors, the backlit keyboard, the ExpressCard slot, and the MagSafe power connector. All of which, to me anyway, closes up the gap nicely. And articles indicate that the Mac also has wireless-N, but is waiting for the drivers/standard to finallize.
And let's not forget OS X, the iLife suite, and the free person-to-person tech support availalbe at your local Apple store. What long-distance Chineese/Indian tech support phone tree do you have to naviagate if your TP has issues?
Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
Macs only have one mouse button, a PC would have two or more. MacOS X doesn't run (legally) on any machine but a Mac. So there! *stomps off to his room*
There are two button mice for Macs, even Apple's Mighty Mouse is a two button mouse. As there aren't buttons on top it doesn't seem to be a two button mouse but it is. And I've got a two button mouse for my almost 10 year old Mac.
FalconShould there be a Law?
What really sold me on the Apple Mac Mini was the OS. But given that Apples seem to cost more than equivalent PCs, if someone could get a legit version of OSX running on a PC, I'd be using a PC and OSX rather than splashing out the extra cash for an Apple.
Ah but would Mac OSX run as good on non Apple hardware? I don't think so, because Apple makes OSX to run only on Mac computers they are able to it just work. If Apple were to make the OS so it would run on any pc then they'd have to test it on a bunch of hardware, that or it wouldn't just work which would give Apple a black eye. Also if they did then they'd run into direct competition with Microsoft possibly causing more trouble for Apple.
FalconShould there be a Law?
How do the Sony Core 2 Duo laptops (SZ/FE/AR) compare to the MacBook Pro? I'm interested in heat/weight/battery life mostly. I know they will both perform well enough. This is going to be a laptop for a non-power user, so comfort/quality is the top priority.
And how many of those aforementioned occupations pays enough for you to afford a Mac?
I see plenty of mathematicians hammering on PCS every day.
The Thinkpad doesn't have a camera, but has a higher resolutions screen, better graphics card, Wireless N (if you want it)
The MacBook Pro comes with a wireless chip set capable of Pre N, it doesn't work because OSX isn't Pre N capable though Leopard will be. Also even if you could use Pre N now it doesn't mean that it will be compatible with other Pre N hardware that's available now nor that it will be upgradable. Though having Pre N may be something to consider until the N standard is approved in 2008 it doesn't really mean much. I don't have a laptop now though I plan on ordering a MacBook Pro in a week or two but when I got a wireless router a few weeks ago when I got a new PC I went ahead and got it with MIMO and it's a Pre N model. Cost wise it didn't make a difference between Pre N and non Pre N models.
FalconShould there be a Law?
All Apple has to do is unbundle their hardware/software, price the MacBook at a comparable cost to the PC, and price OSX at the difference between the current cost and the hardware only cost. You'd still pay the same overall, yet get your hardware at Dell/HP/IBM prices. Would that make you happier?
Nope! What many forget or don't realize is that Apple is as much a hardware as a software company. Apple as already found out that they loose more money by allowing Mac clones than they make in licensing fees for the Mac OS.
FalconShould there be a Law?
A Dell? You'd get a DELL... HAHAHAHA. No wonder why you got a Mac.
Not going to happen. The license of OS X forbids it running on non-Apple hardware.
On the other hand, a lot of that hinges on the validity and legality of the EULA. Apple's position that you cannot legally run OSX on anything other than a Mac is not as strong as it seems, though they can easily not support anyone who tries.
there in no recordable CD or DVD included.
If you mean no media how many manufacturers include media? As for whether the drives are recordable according the MBP page it has a 6x double-layer-burning SuperDrive so it does record. If it doesn't record then Apple is guilty of false advertizing.
FalconShould there be a Law?
This is a rare instance where that statement is neither troll nor ignorance. We're talking about laptops, so the fact that the trackpad has only one button is a real difference between a MacBook Pro and a similar PC laptop. Sure, you can plug in a two button mouse. But if you're buying hardware to run a non-OS X operating system, then the lack of a built-in second button would be considered a serious defect.
Oh, I have no doubt there are PC-using mathematicians among the squares you call your friends. The unfortunate truth, however, is that such beige-thinking types are too rigidly bound by convention to ever amount to anything. Consider the common belief that Macs cost more than PCs. From the fact that you don't even stop to question this orthodoxy, we may infer that you're a PC-using dullard.
It's no coincidence that every Fields medalist, for at least the last twelve years, has been a real Mac user. Successful people tend to be more creative, whimsical, and attractive than you, and the rock stars of geekdom are no exception.
FW800 - What devices do you have that use FW800 and are actually faster because of it? I know I have none. Quick, make something up.
DSRL? External HD? Scanner?
The software is your choice. I find nothing on iLife compelling.
Agreed about iLife. Afterall that's what you get a computer for, the run the software you want to use. Once you know what software you want or need then you pick the OS and hardware.
So after addressing the above, you're saying that you would pay $200 to have a significantly lower resolution screen, a significantly less powerful graphics card all for FW800 (over FW400), the MagSafe, the iSight camera, and ambient lighting sensors? That's fine, but I really find it difficult to argue that this is a wash from a cost-analysis standpoint.
I plan on getting a MBP in a week or two, switching from Windows because of Windows, as well as hardware problems. The most stable Windows I've used is NT4, I've never had my NT4 box crash on me. However I have had other Windows that I've owned as well as that I've used elsewhere crash. The first tyme I used XP it froze before it even finished booting, and it was on a brand new Dell. The PC I'm using now is an HP and I had to have the hd and the motherboard replaced before it was a year old. Prior to the HP I had a PC by Gateway and the same thing happened with it. However I have also bought two Macs that were used when I got them and they both lasted me several years before I had any hardware or software problems. Another factor in switching though is MS's policies requiring Activation and WGA as well as Windows phoning home starting with XP. For me that's more than enough reason to switch to Macs.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Yawn!
Your statement is getting lame and boring. Yes you can save money by getting a PC with similar specs. But if you match all (Even the specs that may not be important to you) the specs, with a an other Major Commercial PC manufacture (Dell, HP. Lenovo...) The price will be around the same say +/- $100 (depending on the total cost of the systems).
Apple will will not License OS X to PCs and they probably will never do that. So stop complaining about it. Besides if OS X did run on Standard PCs in the most part it will probably run like Crap, worse then windows, to many variables out of Apples control and to many drivers for crappy hardware. Apples success with OS X is making sure it works with its hardware as well as possible.
People who get and buy apple computers realize the features are worth the price and they get them. As well OS X tends to use the features well. But Apple and OS X is not for everyone and everyone shouldn't have an Apple. But I think given the chance and in a Perfect world I see the breakdown with my own bias as thus OS X 33%, Linux 25%, Windows 25%, Others 17%. This is in a world where Apple is the Market leader. But anything bigger then that Apple will become like Microsoft and Quality and Security will Crap Out.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
"even people i know that run out an buy Rev A products seem to do fine."
Well, you don't know me, but I've had trouble with a Rev. A iMac; Apple didn't provide enough cooling for the FBT on the analog board. As a result, the built-in monitor is now useless, and the computer won't power up if you still have it connected to the dead monitor. (It didn't even "sad Mac." It had us thinking there was a power supply problem for a while.)
I opened up the case and plugged in a monitor from a Performa PPC, and that works fine except that when the computer goes to sleep automatically, the monitor stays on and just displays black. Interestingly, if you explicitly tell the iMac to go to sleep, the monitor sleeps correctly.
Good description of the problem and how to fix it:
http://www.macopz.com/columns/imacrepair/
I like Apple (for the most part), but I'm never going to buy Rev. A again.
--
This is not a signature.
This is not a signature.
You're right, I meant DSLR, for some reason I frequently make that mistake. I don't know why, though I'm not a pro I am a photographer. Actually I am hoping to get into photography professionally. But I need to work on my composition, and because it's been way too long since I've worked in a darkroom I'll probably have to take some darkroom classes. I loved it when I worked in darkrooms, but I also want to do digital photography as well as try medium format, say get a 645 camera.
Regarding your crashes, I've actually had to replace more Mac's than PC's. I've had one Mac HDD crash and one motherboard fry. I've had only a motherboard go bad on a PC.
My first Mac I got in 1992, it was a SE 30 I got used. It lasted until 2000 when the floppy died. The second Mac I got is a Power Mac 7300/200 I got a few months later also used. When I tried to boot it up early this year it wouldn't, I don't know why. I checked if it was getting power and such but couldn't do much more and it wasn't worth it to have it repaired. I however have had two motherboards, three hdds, and some ram from pcs die. The two motherboards and two of the three hdds died before they were a year old. I bought three PCs brand new and another one that was remanufactured and I've had hardware problems with three of them. The one PC I didn't have hardware problems with is a DEC Alpha running Windows NT4, but because it's an Alpha I haven't been able to get much software installed on it so I haven't used it much.
Your experiences with Macs vs PCs are opposite to mine.
The Mac is basically using the same hardware so failure rates are likely the same. Sounds like you had a run of bad luck. I typically don't use major vendors but assemble the hardware myself.
This is true now but it's not true for the old Macs like my SE30. As for the PC systems I got, two were from Gateway, one from HP, and the Alpha is from Microway. While I've added and replaced parts myself like hdds, ram, and video cards I haven't build one totally from parts. I started to, I had most of the pieces assembled, er bought, when I lost them. However now unless you want a custom built system it's cheaper to buy a compleat system.
The activation thing doesn't bother me.
It bothers me, the only thing that should be needed is a product key or serial number to activate any software, whether an OS or not.
FalconShould there be a Law?
I upgraded from the ORIGINAL G4 Titanium from 5 years ago. So ya, it's pretty nice. But to be perfectly honest, the "benchmarks" comparing my 5yr old powerbook to this new macbook pro would place the new one as being ~500-1000% faster. So... what I'm trying to say is that I don't really notice anything being that much faster :) It's nice to have the latest and greatest, but I probably wouldn't have upgraded if my old one hadn't pretty much died.
...the Mac Pro and MacBook Pro are thousands less than their Dell equivalents.
Utterly stupid!
1) Dell is not the only manufacturor of non-mac PCs.
2) Dell is not the cheapest manufacturor of non-mac PCs.
3) What is this obsession Mac fanboys have with Dell? Surely you could pick someone a little classier as your competition yardstick?
4) Look at Asus notebooks. Better specced, lighter, smaller, cheaper. Same chinese 60hrs/week factory Macs come from
Hope thats cleared up any confusion!
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
You picked up on the area of the Mac product line where a lot of enthusiasts find a big hole, and i'd like to see them put something in there to fill the gap. The iMac is really a desktop for general use, home users that just want to web surf and office folk that just do Word or basic design stuff. The Mac Pro is a heavy duty workstation built for really intensive AV work and absolute overkill for a hobbyist.
Maybe they'll pad out the product line with a Core 2 Duo, non integrated box. I'd buy one in a flash.
I won't bother to explain my circumstances in great detail, but they involve coming back from a lousy Irish pub Saturday and then fooling around on my computer for an hour or two with all the useful effects of alcohol in place, such as loss of memory and impaired judgment. Beer goggled, I got busy with an ugly girl who talks too much last night, and that girl was Slashdot and its myriad posters too cowardly to support their statements with an actual login.
:) Obviously you can't make the same claim, or you would have posted using your login name. Later, coward.
That's all you really need to know. Actually, that's more than you need to know. I've told you this because there seems to be a void in your mind representing the puzzlement and incredulity correspondent with the lack of understanding of my circumstances. Speaking of "lack": You lack any power in this situation, so keep in mind that I'm explaining this to you out of courtesy, and not because you, who lack even the respect to identify yourself, matter in the least.
As far as reading my comment history goes, I welcome it. I stand by everything I've ever written
Who's arguing, you're just making nonsensical statements.
Only in the sense that arguing with any mac lover is nonsensical. There is no making sense to a fanatic.
In a head to head quality test (subjected to heat, dropping, etc.) the macbook pro finished dead last. *way* last. In fact, it took almost nothing to break it. Add to that the difficulty in opening it to reseat stuff that may have been shaken up and you have a physical maintenance disaster.
They've been failing at a rate of ~35%; many DOA.
What makes them attractive? Essentially the OS. The Windows OS machines have security and SW issues at a rate an order of magnitude higher than OSX.
That more than makes up for it.
While their laptops are a maintenance nightmare, their tower is the best PC made. And the iMac seems to be high quality as well.
There is hope...
Just because yours was OK doesn't mean every single one was.
I fix them for a living though, so I am not just blowing wind, I see all the machines that customers are unhappy with. Today I installed a program today that allows manual control of the "minimum speed" of the fans in my pro and I have to say apple seems to have picked a very good speed for the fans. I tested them with various processor and graphics loads, and the fans only spooled up when the laptop's temperature started to get up there. Right now it shows 132F, relatively idle, and at least in this room it appears to be dead silent. If I max the fans right now it drops to 118F but it sounds like a jet.
At least with the current technologies, I would propose "quiet, small, cool, fast, pick three." I don't want to compromise on small or fast, and I think Apple is giving us a flexible tradeoff between the two that remain: cool and quiet.
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Anyone know how these compare? I want to purchase something to replace my G4 Powerbook soon, and am being seduced by the smaller size on the Macbook..
..don't panic
My PowerBook has had its main logic board replaced around six times over its three year lifespan. Most of these were due to poor quality-control; I'd get it back from repair and have to send it back in immediately.
If you have any way of buying through the higher education store, then I would definitely advise this, since they now include a three year warranty with all hardware bought from there.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Entirely different situation. When one more clone company starts up, the hardware manufacturing is compromised, but the marketplace doesn't increase in size at all.
When (if, of course) you open your OS to the other 95% of machines already out there, your hardware manufacturing (which is relatively low margin, remember) becomes irrelevant to your software manufacturing, which now has a potential marketplace that has expanded by a factor of twenty or so, where your software margins can approach 100% (download the OS, it is literally "pennies to ship", and the more you ship, the less per unit it costs you.)
Apple certainly has the right to make the choice to not do this, but they cannot force remaining a closed hardware/software company to make more economic sense as compared to just going to an OS company a'la MS; it doesn't, and it never will.
Yes, they'd have some more work to do in terms of drivers — video and network cards in particular — but they've already done a fabulous job on printers, firewire, and USB devices, so I'd say that really, a great deal of the ground they need to cover is already done. And they'd have all that extra money to do it with, so... :-)
MS isn't selling to 20x the number of computers because its a better OS. It isn't, period. They sell because people are sensitive to the price point. OSX is better, and even spending more for the machine actually makes economic sense if you are a heavy computer user. But still, windows outsells OSX. It's all about the price point with your average consumer, and as long as Apple continues to make all its own hardware, that price point is going to remain well above the potential floor, and sales will remain comparatively low.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
MS isn't selling to 20x the number of computers because its a better OS. It isn't, period. They sell because people are sensitive to the price point. OSX is better, and even spending more for the machine actually makes economic sense if you are a heavy computer user. But still, windows outsells OSX. It's all about the price point with your average consumer, and as long as Apple continues to make all its own hardware, that price point is going to remain well above the potential floor, and sales will remain comparatively low.
Are you suggesting Apple become a software company? Or continue building computers and release OSX for generic PCs? While I'd like to see the second, if Apple does release OSX for any pc then they'd run right into Microsoft. One of the most widely used apps is MS Office, there's versions for both PCs and Macs, but MS could pull the rug out from under the Mac version. If so while current Mac users may stay with Macs I don't think many people would risk switching and lose Office. Now if Apple were to use Intel's virtual tech to run both Windows and OSX at the same tyme on the same box, then maybe it wouldn't matter so much as people could use both OSes at the same tyme. Now that's assuming Intel's tech is ready but I don't think it is yet. If so then maybe Apple could work with Intel to get it working.
FalconShould there be a Law?
I forgot that it wasn't just the Rev. A, and you're right, it worked for a long time without problems.
I didn't mean to blame Apple, I was just saying that you're probably better off not buying Rev. A from anyone, though I now realize that's contradictory. Ah, forget it and just make sure you get AppleCare.
(Well that made me feel a little stupid.)
--
This is not a signature.
This is not a signature.
If you have any way of buying through the higher education store, then I would definitely advise this, since they now include a three year warranty with all hardware bought from there.
I didn't know that, it's a major plus given what we're saying.
spoonerize "magic trackpad"
i realize that's a debatable topic maybe? obviously you had the first CRT iMac, and that's a real Rev A. in a sense isn't the first slot loading CRT iMac (Rev D or whatever it was) subject to some of the issues a Rev A has?
i got the first Core 2 Duo iMac a few weeks after it came out, though it would hardly be considered a Rev A since that case originated with a G5 iMac. it has been tweaked (iSight camera included, innards shuffled) since the G5 version, they have replaced the optical drives, redone the layout a bit. while i share the hesitation of buying a Rev A machine.... buying this machine made me ponder what really counts as a Rev A?
the Mac Pro tower looks the same as the G5 towers, but the insides have been totally redone. they were redone a few times with the G5 chips as well, so any revision to the machine made changes.
just a guess, but personally i think the laptops are where the real Rev A issues can come out? real world use may reveal issues with a hinge assembly or some durability that doesn't hold up. as for desktops, i would think it is more an issue of quality control on the components, and those can change with every revision. i am sure there are exceptions, but in general a desktop machine is pretty basic. i suppose Apple could completely screw up a desktop machine, like if the G4 iMac (the sunflower looking one) had an arm that just flopped over after a few months, but that's the risk of thinking outside the box. i can only assume those CRT iMacs were tested extensively without fans, and seeing how most of them held up fine, i am going to blame quality control. the G4 cube lacked a fan, but had an external display and power supply, so that was a relative cakewalk. it is interesting that the eMac had a fan. i wondered if it was a response to the FBT issues, or something else in the components they knew would heat up. one issue i saw with iMacs in cluttered settings was people putting crap on top of the machine (blocking the vents on top). i can't imagine that was good for it.
We've got a //GS (mid '80s) and a Performa 6300CD (mid '90s?) that still run fine (other than being out of date). (Though the //GS is old enough that I might not remember if it had a problem.) I guess I just got used to machines lasting practically forever, and started expecting that in all of them. So yeah, it's debatable how long we should expect them to last.
This is not a signature.
The Core 2 Duo Macbooks are out since last week, yet there is still no slashdot headline? What gives? And yes, I tried submitting one and it got rejected.