MacBook Pro Gets Santa Rosa Chipset, LED Screen

frdmfghtr writes "TechNewsWorld is reporting that Apple has updated the MacBook Pro line with the Santa Rosa chipset from Intel. In addition, Apple is also introducing mercury-free displays with some models. 'When Apple presented new editions of its MacBook line last month, the company excluded the latest Intel Centrino chips, dubbed "Santa Rosa," which had been released just days prior. The chips have found their way into Apple's new high-end MacBook Pro notebooks, which the company revealed Tuesday. Certain models use mercury-free displays, falling in line with the company's recent ecological promises.'"

Comments

How about color quality?

[J. T. MacLeod]

I'm incredibly excited at the prospect of an LED display. Not only would the lighting be easier on the eyes, but lower-power and safer.

As some one who's concerned with color correction, though, I wonder how accurate and vivid are the colors on these new screens. I'm not ordering one to find out.

Re:How about color quality?

[jddj]

Color Guru Andrew Rodney has said in several online fora that the wider gamut of LED-illuminated monitors is not necessarily a good thing. A wider gamut does not necesarily mean a larger gamut.

If that doesn't make intuitive sense to you, think about this example: You place 5 stones in a straight line on the ground at 1-foot intervals. Now pick them up and place the same 5 stones at 2-foot intervals. You've created a wider figure, but have not increased the number of stones - the figure still has the same number of intervals.

If each of the stones in the above example represents a shade of color, then simply widening the gamut without providing additional color resolution - more than eight bits per color channel, for example - will not display additional color information, and in fact will worsen the display's performance at reproducing the smaller gamut of the sRGB colorspace (the assumed colorspace for Windows machines and most digital cameras).

If this is yet-another 6-bit display, this situation will be even worse

I'm definitely the target buyer for this machine, but am cautiously sitting on my hands, awaiting word from the color-management community on how it fares, and to see if Apple has finally fixed the battery and other problems that have dogged the MacBook Pro line.

display

[Peter La Casse]

The biggest news IMO is that the 17" MacBook Pro now comes with a 1920x1200 screen option. I've got that on my 15.4" Sager now, and it's wonderful. I'd rather have another 15.4", but I'd rather not step down to 1440x900.

I wish they quit keeping the "price points"

[Shivetya]

and allow for most variety in configurations so that there would be "Pro" level laptops at more affordable prices.

I like the discreet video, I do not need the 2.4, the monster drive, the large memory....

so what about 1.66 or 1.83s with similar features, chipset, and such at a lower cost. 1gb memory, discreet graphics, for around $1500?

Are they trying to protect the value of the previous generation still on the shelf?

Re:Apple surrenders?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm a former Apple Engineer, and I'm really getting a kick out of these replies.

From talking with my former co-workers, Apple had been working with engineering sample LED backlight systems for almost a year when Greenpeace made their attention whoring report. Apple didn't choose LED systems only because they were mercury-free, they were also looking at lower power, brighter, longer lasting, and far cheaper to mass produce than cold cathode.

Clearly Greenpeace had learned Apple was working on migrating their whole lineup to "greener", so they beat them to the punch with a completely bogus report. At that point, anything Apple did would seem as if it was a reaction to Greenpeace. Engineering lead times are far too long for these new backlights to have been brought in after the Greenpeace slander job.