[Robster1958]

I don't get it....we almost get there, but don't. I am talking about the $1,599 model. Very good performance, excellent form factor (even 4.5 pounds is now acceptable to me, since i am carrying around a billet of aluminum), and yes - illuminated keyboard, a great feature for me that no one else seems to offer (sony?)

So I see the Mb's on display, and notice immediately a washed out look of the screens. ok, i see..you must be angled vertically correct to your line of sight, more so than on any other screen i have seen. even then, the screen cannot compare with smaller vaios (TT or Z), and night and day to the MB Pro. As I compared the MB to MB Pro, it is sad that Apple allows the new MacBook to be so hobbled.

Yes I know it is not a MB Pro 13", but raising the price as they did, and not improving (worsening?) a huge functional feature is the ultimate in style over substance. Or is the lighting really bad in the stores? but even with glossy only on the Pro's, the difference was immense.

Now I am "mad" at Apple...make me buy a bigger form factor than i find comfortable...or switch to Sony Z.

[Urkel]

I have to say the screen has been extremely disappointing. A lot of people defend the screen despite never actually using it, but as someone who's had the Macbook since day 1 then I have to say that the "glossy" screens in past macbooks is nothing like this "Glassy" mirror finish of the new ones. And before people think this is an anti-Apple opinion, my distaste for the new screens is towards ANY manufacturer who goes overboard with reflective surfaces.

I was at a relatives house and he mistakenly thought my Macbook was an HP. Judging by the ugly aesthetics on both and the overly-glossy screens then I don't blame him. I think Apple made a real statement with past models because they were truly iconic. The new models are pretty bland.

[pwrmacg4]

I have same problem with older... does macbook air have same problem? But maybe these bad screens might be excellent at night...watching movies?

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Robster1958 

So I see the Mb's on display, and notice immediately a washed out look of the screens. ok, i see..you must be angled vertically correct to your line of sight, more so than on any other screen i have seen. even then, the screen cannot compare with smaller vaios (TT or Z), and night and day to the MB Pro. As I compared the MB to MB Pro, it is sad that Apple allows the new MacBook to be so hobbled.

Yes I know it is not a MB Pro 13", but raising the price as they did, and not improving (worsening?) a huge functional feature is the ultimate in style over substance. Or is the lighting really bad in the stores? but even with glossy only on the Pro's, the difference was immense.

Did you compare it to a white MB? The previous generation was pretty bad.

Originally Posted by pwrmacg4 

I have same problem with older... does macbook air have same problem? But maybe these bad screens might be excellent at night...watching movies?

As far as I know they're still using a better display in the MBA, just as they did with the previous version.

[Brien]

Originally Posted by Urkel 

I have to say the screen has been extremely disappointing. A lot of people defend the screen despite never actually using it, but as someone who's had the Macbook since day 1 then I have to say that the "glossy" screens in past macbooks is nothing like this "Glassy" mirror finish of the new ones. And before people think this is an anti-Apple opinion, my distaste for the new screens is towards ANY manufacturer who goes overboard with reflective surfaces.

I was at a relatives house and he mistakenly thought my Macbook was an HP. Judging by the ugly aesthetics on both and the overly-glossy screens then I don't blame him. I think Apple made a real statement with past models because they were truly iconic. The new models are pretty bland.

Yeah, going silver+black isn't really that different from what everyone else is doing. Oh well.

[MartiNZ]

Wow that HP is one not bad looking PC!

I've only seen the alumacbook on display and not compared to a new MBP, but I didn't have any issue with how the display looked. I did a colour calibration and that as usual improved things to my tastes, but I really like the idea of the glass cover especially for cleaning, and I rather liked how it looked in the shop!

I agree it is a shame that they are using lower quality screens than in the MBP though, especially when they're now all about how they're not skimping on quality in the cheaper machines. Apple just doesn't talk about that stuff, and most importantly, they don't give options . My brother's Dell laptop from six or seven years ago had a better display in terms of viewing angles than anything I've seen since, because it was the best available from their OPTIONS!

[NeverTriedApple]

Originally Posted by Robster1958 

.... illuminated keyboard, a great feature for me that no one else seems to offer (sony?)

Life long feature of Thinkpads.

[Ted L. Nancy]

Originally Posted by Urkel 

A lot of people defend the screen despite never actually using it...

The new models are pretty bland.

Ahem.

Went from hi-def 17" MBP to 2.0 Alum Macbook. I love the screen. Most consumers seem to be impressed with it's "looks" as well.

Sorry the OP decided he disliked it. Oh well.

And on another note illustrating how people have different tastes, so many people have asked me about my new laptop after looking at it, but few have taken a bite and told me it was "bland."

[fisherKing]

it IS sad...i got to compare, side-by-side, a white macbook, the new macbook, a previous-gen mbp, and the new mbp.
i set all to the same default monitor setting (in sys prefs), turned the brightness up, and compared screens.

my fave (much to my surprise) was the new mbp (even tho not a fan of glossy screens); just bright, sharp, good color. next, the matte mbp, then...the white macbook. the colors were RICHER than the new macbook (and the glare was far less than the new macbook).

the new macbook, design & weight notwithstanding, with it's mediocre mirror (i mean screen) and no firewire is a HUGE disappointment.

[0157988944]

The HP may look the same, but feels like cheap crap. That's what Apple gets that no one else seems to. Feel is key. I don't want my laptop creaking when I move it. A solid aluminum shell feels sturdy and nice.

[Robster1958]

Originally Posted by NeverTriedApple 

Life long feature of Thinkpads.

the only thinkpad i had...like 5 years ago, had the little led bulb on the top bezel of the screen. not nearly as good as the MBP's, unless lenovo changed it.

[Robster1958]

Also......what's really sad is how Jobs is condescending when he talked about $500 laptops..."not being in Apple's DNA to build crap." i may be paraphrasing, but you get the idea. Then how does he justify this crappy screen in a $1500 laptop? And I don't think this opinion of the screen is totally subjective; most people that own laptops with better screens see it immediately.

the only possibility is that maybe the first batch of these MB's are defective, along the lines of the early iPod Touch (which I bought and returned for a newer build). In fact, the inability to see black/dark scenes clearly was the Touch screen's problem, and was clearly inferior to the gen1 iPhone.

[solofx7]

Originally Posted by Robster1958 

I don't get it....we almost get there, but don't. I am talking about the $1,599 model. Very good performance, excellent form factor (even 4.5 pounds is now acceptable to me, since i am carrying around a billet of aluminum), and yes - illuminated keyboard, a great feature for me that no one else seems to offer (sony?)

So I see the Mb's on display, and notice immediately a washed out look of the screens. ok, i see..you must be angled vertically correct to your line of sight, more so than on any other screen i have seen. even then, the screen cannot compare with smaller vaios (TT or Z), and night and day to the MB Pro. As I compared the MB to MB Pro, it is sad that Apple allows the new MacBook to be so hobbled.

Yes I know it is not a MB Pro 13", but raising the price as they did, and not improving (worsening?) a huge functional feature is the ultimate in style over substance. Or is the lighting really bad in the stores? but even with glossy only on the Pro's, the difference was immense.

Now I am "mad" at Apple...make me buy a bigger form factor than i find comfortable...or switch to Sony Z.

I must respectfully decline.
First I think that people are so very critical of Apple. A huge part of that is because of their secrecy/expectations. Self-imposed as it is, there are good and bad parts to that.
For the record, I have both machines sitting here right next to each other. The 13.3 $1299 unit is for a friend of mine. I opted for the $2499 unit.
First, there is a difference in the screens and because of what I read here, I decided to spend the extra coin on the $1999 unit. for the record, I just went into the store, where they were holding the $2499 unit. The other was at the Fedex facility where I picked it up. The reason I say this is because I did not look at either screen first hand before I purchased either one. Yes I know this "washer out" look thing is all very subjective.
My point of this whole thing is both units, side by side, the pro's screen is better. Not by leaps and bounds, but it is better. Does that alone merit the price difference? Not by a long shot.
Had I looked at the screens right next to each other, I would have gotten the 13.3 because for the money, it is one of the best deals in computing. No, the $500 pc's cannot hold a candle.
A couple of quick screen points:
1. these are a new generation of screens, LED, meaning things are different. You have to give a little to get a little.
2. to me the led screens are a tad bit to bright at their brightest and thus the washing out of the screen colors.
Bottom line is that I think that people are being a wayyyyy bit to harsh on Apple in a lot of ways. If you are going to buy a sony/pc operating system because the screen is not as good as the pro, then the screen is probably not the real reason.
for the record, before I bought a mac many years ago, I was going to go with a sony, but I would have to go with Windows/deal killer, and sony felt like the best made laptop on the windows side.
There is a screen difference, but it is not nearly as big as people make it seem.
I make this call based on my reputation and the fact that both machines have been at home under real world conditions.

[Gee4orce]

I compare the new MB to the Air, instore. The screen was what swayed it for me totally - so I bought a refurb Air. Had the MB had the same screen as the Air, I probably would have bought that instead.

[0157988944]

SoloFX, LED has nothing to do with washed out colors. The current and last gen MBPs are LED, and they have fine color. It's a matter of the LCD panels, which are cheap crap.

[handspring]

Originally Posted by Robster1958 

the only thinkpad i had...like 5 years ago, had the little led bulb on the top bezel of the screen. not nearly as good as the MBP's, unless lenovo changed it.

Yeah, they still have the "Think Lights"...incomparable to a backlit keyboard.

[solofx7]

Originally Posted by adamfishercox 

SoloFX, LED has nothing to do with washed out colors. The current and last gen MBPs are LED, and they have fine color. It's a matter of the LCD panels, which are cheap crap.

I think that the OP was a bit too harsh, which as a consumer he or she reserves the right to be.
My point is that I am looking at them both side by side and have no issues with either one.
One does look a little better than the other, but not enough to make me "jump back over the fence"
There is nothing that spectacular over there.

[Urkel]

Originally Posted by solofx7 

Had I looked at the screens right next to each other, I would have gotten the 13.3 because for the money, it is one of the best deals in computing. No, the $500 pc's cannot hold a candle.

Don't get me wrong. I own the new Macbook and buy way too many Apple products, but "one of the best deals in computing"? Seriously? I don't regret my Macbook purchase, but there's no way I could pretend I got some sort of bargain here. (And what's with comparing it to a $500 PC?)

If you match it up to the $1000+ systems then the specs of the Mac are severely outmatched. 2.0ghz/2GB/160GB HDD are straight out of 2007 and this is a 2009 machine that won't get updated for at least 12months. Take a look at PCs in this price range and you'll see stuff like 4GB RAM/320GB HDD, Blu-Ray, HDMI, SD Slots, Discrete video cards, Firewire, GPS, Express Slot etc as standard.

But what is the big new feature for Apple? Aluminium chassis and glass screen. Don't get me wrong. They are cool but hardly groundbreaking or necessary because we have yet to see anyone walk around with a flaccid plastic Macbook sobbing "if only it was solid aluminum...". It's no secret that since the Intel switch then the insides are going to crap out way before the outsides.

Originally Posted by solofx7 

There is a screen difference, but it is not nearly as big as people make it seem.
I make this call based on my reputation and the fact that both machines have been at home under real world conditions.

Having it work "at home in real world conditions" is great. But the problem is having it work EVERYWHERE you want it to work. (Photo from ZDNet AppleCore Article)

[tie]

I have to agree. I looked at the new Macbook and the screen was rather depressing. I don't want to have to look at that bad a screen. Sitting by itself, I hated it. Sitting side-by-side with the new Macbook Pro, the difference was enormous. This was in a store with bad lighting conditions, though.

That said, Apple will probably end up making more money from this. I haven't ordered yet, but since I don't want to carry something as heavy as the MBP I think I will have to get the Macbook and several external displays. With a better screen, I'd just use the built-in display.

[solofx7]

Originally Posted by Urkel 

Don't get me wrong. I own the new Macbook and buy way too many Apple products, but "one of the best deals in computing"? Seriously? I don't regret my Macbook purchase, but there's no way I could pretend I got some sort of bargain here. (And what's with comparing it to a $500 PC?)

If you match it up to the $1000+ systems then the specs of the Mac are severely outmatched. 2.0ghz/2GB/160GB HDD are straight out of 2007 and this is a 2009 machine that won't get updated for at least 12months. Take a look at PCs in this price range and you'll see stuff like 4GB RAM/320GB HDD, Blu-Ray, HDMI, SD Slots, Discrete video cards, Firewire, GPS, Express Slot etc as standard.

But what is the big new feature for Apple? Aluminium chassis and glass screen. Don't get me wrong. They are cool but hardly groundbreaking or necessary because we have yet to see anyone walk around with a flaccid plastic Macbook sobbing "if only it was solid aluminum...". It's no secret that since the Intel switch then the insides are going to crap out way before the outsides.



Having it work "at home in real world conditions" is great. But the problem is having it work EVERYWHERE you want it to work. (Photo from ZDNet AppleCore Article)

again, the comparison cannot just be made specs to specs.
Apple has been indirectly pointing that out for years.
Seriously a $500 PC is in no way shape or form a comparable to any mac.
Specs maybe, but are you trying to say the OS does not exist?
This started about the screen compare, and since i had them side by side and had both at home for a nice length of time, i weighed in.
I think that quality, size, specs, and SOFTWARE make this the best mobile computing deal out there.
Some may not agree, but this new macbook is a huge feather in the cap for apple.
I just do not think that you can compare a $500 pc to the work of art that is a macbook

[fisherKing]

Originally Posted by solofx7 

again, the comparison cannot just be made specs to specs.
Apple has been indirectly pointing that out for years.
Seriously a $500 PC is in no way shape or form a comparable to any mac.
Specs maybe, but are you trying to say the OS does not exist?
This started about the screen compare, and since i had them side by side and had both at home for a nice length of time, i weighed in.
I think that quality, size, specs, and SOFTWARE make this the best mobile computing deal out there.
Some may not agree, but this new macbook is a huge feather in the cap for apple.
I just do not think that you can compare a $500 pc to the work of art that is a macbook

sure, but what about comparing apples to apples? the white macbook screen, sitting next to the new macbook, was LESS reflective and stronger at displaying color than the new book; how is that ok? sure the screen pales next to the pro (altho personally i don't think that's reasonable), but worse than an earlier 'book?

[amazing]

macintouch.com has tried an anti-glare film, with pictures

http://www.macintouch.com/reviews/al...x.html#updates

At this point, the sizing doesn't seem to be something you can buy off the shelf, and putting it on might be a problem for loads of people?

[Yortuk]

Originally Posted by tie 

I think I will have to get the Macbook and several external displays. With a better screen, I'd just use the built-in display.

That's the approach I took. I bought a nice 26" display for about what I saved by not getting the MacBook Pro. I haven't got an adapter for my shiny new monitor yet, so I've been using the built-in display. The only time I notice any issues is when there are large dark areas being displayed. I set my desktop to a lighter image and that helps a lot. My main issue is just that screen is smaller than I'm used to, but that was the trade-off I made for better portability.

One note in favor of the MacBook display is that it's very bright. My old laptop was a PowerBook G4 that was nearly unusable in bright conditions -- couldn't even sit near a window on a sunny day. The MacBook's size and bright display make it a great portable.

But as soon as they offer one with an edge-to-edge OLED, I'll be first in line. That would be, like a 14.5" screen. And with no backlight, they could even put the webcam behind the OLED, and just turn off a few pixels in the menu-bar when the camera's in use. And as long as I'm redesigning things, I'll throw in 8GB of ram, a 300GB SSD, and ditch the optical drive to make room for a 10hr battery!

[Urkel]

Originally Posted by solofx7 

again, the comparison cannot just be made specs to specs.
Apple has been indirectly pointing that out for years.
Seriously a $500 PC is in no way shape or form a comparable to any mac.
Specs maybe, but are you trying to say the OS does not exist?
This started about the screen compare, and since i had them side by side and had both at home for a nice length of time, i weighed in.
I think that quality, size, specs, and SOFTWARE make this the best mobile computing deal out there.
Some may not agree, but this new macbook is a huge feather in the cap for apple.
I just do not think that you can compare a $500 pc to the work of art that is a macbook

Please don't take this as anything more than a friendly discussion, but it should be pointed out that YOU are the one making the PC comparisons by stating "this is one of the best deals in computing" and constantly referring to a "$500 PC". (I could argue for hours over the value of disposable $500 PC's, but since that isn't anywhere near the topic of this discussion then I don't understand why it keeps being brought up.)

If you want to factor in OS's then you need to compare Apple to Apples. And in terms of value, I'd have to say that the $999 Macbook is the best value out there.

White: $999, Intel Chipset, Firewire, LCD
It's amazing how quickly people can turn. Up until 2 weeks ago people were defending the Intel Chipset and the White Macbook as being "beautiful and powerful". Now there's a new Macbook and suddenly "those suck". We have 2 of these and not only are they very capable machines, the LCD angles and glare are much better than the new Macbook. So at $999 then this has higher specs for less money.

Aluminum: $1299, Nvidia, Solid Aluminum, LED
First off, they raised the entry level price to the "new" Macbooks $200. That already is tough to swallow, especially considering the Nvidia chipset is the ONLY thing that gives it superiority over the Whitebook. The aluminum frame is nice but nobody could legitimately claim the Plastic macbooks were fragile. The LED Glass does pop more but it also requires higher brightness which washes out blacks. No Firewire. And let's be honest here, nobody was begging for DisplayPort on a strictly consumer-oriented notebook.


Again, I'm not trying to prove one is "better" than the other. I'm just saying that if we're talking about "best value" then the whitebook offers much more for much less. That said, I'm a realistic Apple user so "value" means less to me than pure desire. I'm holding out for matte, but if nothing happens by Macworld then I'll gladly overpay for an ugly, shiny, slippery Macbook Pro.

[Chuckit]

I've always said the graphics in the old MacBook were crap.

[solofx7]

Originally Posted by fisherKing 

sure, but what about comparing apples to apples? the white macbook screen, sitting next to the new macbook, was LESS reflective and stronger at displaying color than the new book; how is that ok? sure the screen pales next to the pro (altho personally i don't think that's reasonable), but worse than an earlier 'book?

I must admit that I never looked at the white macbook, so you win that.
I concede defeat

[zaghahzag]

the black border around the screen is heinous. I guess they had to do that to get so much glass over the screen..

anyway, the new machines are ugly compared to the old ones. i would have liked to see them keep the silver border on the MBP. it looks 100x better than the new one.

apple was on such a roll with their laptops for so long, it's a shame but not a complete shock that they lay an egg.

[solofx7]

Originally Posted by Urkel 

Please don't take this as anything more than a friendly discussion, but it should be pointed out that YOU are the one making the PC comparisons by stating "this is one of the best deals in computing" and constantly referring to a "$500 PC". (I could argue for hours over the value of disposable $500 PC's, but since that isn't anywhere near the topic of this discussion then I don't understand why it keeps being brought up.)

If you want to factor in OS's then you need to compare Apple to Apples. And in terms of value, I'd have to say that the $999 Macbook is the best value out there.

White: $999, Intel Chipset, Firewire, LCD
It's amazing how quickly people can turn. Up until 2 weeks ago people were defending the Intel Chipset and the White Macbook as being "beautiful and powerful". Now there's a new Macbook and suddenly "those suck". We have 2 of these and not only are they very capable machines, the LCD angles and glare are much better than the new Macbook. So at $999 then this has higher specs for less money.

Aluminum: $1299, Nvidia, Solid Aluminum, LED
First off, they raised the entry level price to the "new" Macbooks $200. That already is tough to swallow, especially considering the Nvidia chipset is the ONLY thing that gives it superiority over the Whitebook. The aluminum frame is nice but nobody could legitimately claim the Plastic macbooks were fragile. The LED Glass does pop more but it also requires higher brightness which washes out blacks. No Firewire. And let's be honest here, nobody was begging for DisplayPort on a strictly consumer-oriented notebook.


Again, I'm not trying to prove one is "better" than the other. I'm just saying that if we're talking about "best value" then the whitebook offers much more for much less. That said, I'm a realistic Apple user so "value" means less to me than pure desire. I'm holding out for matte, but if nothing happens by Macworld then I'll gladly overpay for an ugly, shiny, slippery Macbook Pro.

I have to say your comment at the end about the macbook pro was very funny, and i needed a laugh on monday.
I again will have to give in on this one. I have not used the lil white one enough to know.
I am only stating from a touching, feeling, using, perspective, that for the money, i think that there in not a better deal out there.
though i have not done so with everything.
I just like the new ones, and I think from a consumer standpoint, the quality level is rather high and thus makes the deal that much sweeter.

[solofx7]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

I've always said the graphics in the old MacBook were crap.

I never tried them, and until my iMac got stolen last week, I did not need any better graphics than those offered by the 1299 unit...

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by zaghahzag 

the black border around the screen is heinous. I guess they had to do that to get so much glass over the screen..

anyway, the new machines are ugly compared to the old ones. i would have liked to see them keep the silver border on the MBP. it looks 100x better than the new one.

apple was on such a roll with their laptops for so long, it's a shame but not a complete shock that they lay an egg.

The *vast* majority of customers I've talked to *completely* disagree.

Regardless, they're selling as fast as we can get them.

[amazing]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Regardless, they're selling as fast as we can get them.

There's a lot to be said for lightweight and being able to decently run games--that in itself is a huge market that Apple completely ignored with the previous MBs.

Remember how everyone castigated Apple for coming up with such a poor gaming laptop? Gaming explains much of the huge pent-up demand--you know, sending a kid off to college with a laptop that was lousy at gaming might have seemed like a good idea to the parents, but it was a weird decision on Apple's part to ignore that market.

[Spheric Harlot]

It certainly worked well enough to make the (plastic) MacBook series the best-selling computer of all time (IIRC), gaming or no.

[Urkel]

YouTube: 9-5 Mac unintentionally shows how crappy new MBP screen is

Look, I know we can all justify how our Macbook screens "aren't that bad". But take a look at the video. They intended to slam Windows but the bigger story is how terrible that screen reflection is in a "real world" environment.

[Spheric Harlot]

That's an exceptionally crappy camera, though.

Your eyes are WAY better at contrast adjustment and content focus.

Not saying that glossy won't be a problem for some people, but simply that that particular video is *terrible* for judging how much of a problem it is.

I spent much of this morning doing some light reading and surfing on the MacBook Pro in a brightly-lit environment, and was surprised that the glossiness didn't bother me AT ALL.

[Chuckit]

Yeah, the glossy screens bother me, but it's really hard to judge how "crappy" a computer screen is based on images from a camera. Cameras do not see things the way we do.

[Yortuk]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Yeah, the glossy screens bother me, but it's really hard to judge how "crappy" a computer screen is based on images from a camera. Cameras do not see things the way we do.

Also the camera is shooting from an angle. If I look at my screen from that angle I see reflections, but looking straight on I only see noticeable reflection if there's a light source directly behind me.

[Mojo]

Originally Posted by amazing 

macintouch.com has tried an anti-glare film, with pictures

http://www.macintouch.com/reviews/al...x.html#updates

At this point, the sizing doesn't seem to be something you can buy off the shelf, and putting it on might be a problem for loads of people?

The anti-glare film is better but there is still a fair amount of reflected light compared to a standard matte screen...

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Yortuk 

Also the camera is shooting from an angle. If I look at my screen from that angle I see reflections, but looking straight on I only see noticeable reflection if there's a light source directly behind me.

You're obviously not very bright.

[mduell]

(click for source)

[solofx7]

glossy = great times

[fisherKing]

Originally Posted by solofx7 

glossy = great times

the earlier macbook is glossy; not crazy about it, but it's viewable. the new pro has a great screen.
but the new macbook is very mirror-like, and i find it difficult. still, whatever makes one happy...

[solofx7]

Originally Posted by fisherKing 

the earlier macbook is glossy; not crazy about it, but it's viewable. the new pro has a great screen.
but the new macbook is very mirror-like, and i find it difficult. still, whatever makes one happy...

i must agree.
same thing with the imac.
i do not think that apple is going to change that.
people seem to like it, but then a lot of people go nuts about it like it is the worst thing ever.

[Maflynn]

Originally Posted by solofx7 

but then a lot of people go nuts about it like it is the worst thing ever.

You probably didn't see the posts/threads about the lack of firewire then.

People are frothing at the mouth because of that and it seems people have lined up on both sides of the camp - defending apple or complaining about the move

[fisherKing]

Originally Posted by Maflynn 

You probably didn't see the posts/threads about the lack of firewire then.

People are frothing at the mouth because of that and it seems people have lined up on both sides of the camp - defending apple or complaining about the move

one thought about firewire (yes, i know this is a thread about the screen); if you don't use it, or don't miss it...fine.
but for those of us who DO use FW (and wanted a small light mac ala 12" powerbook, or ibook...or even the previous macbooks); for us, this is a serious omission.

the screen...sucked, when i saw it lined up next to the older macbook, the older macbook pro, and the new pro...

[solofx7]

Originally Posted by Maflynn 

You probably didn't see the posts/threads about the lack of firewire then.

People are frothing at the mouth because of that and it seems people have lined up on both sides of the camp - defending apple or complaining about the move

i know that i am going to start a huge fight, but i think that is more of a professional type product and is better suited for the pro unit.
but i also agree if it does not cost much that it should be on everything.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by solofx7 

i know that i am going to start a huge fight, but i think that is more of a professional type product and is better suited for the pro unit.
but i also agree if it does not cost much that it should be on everything.

The fight has already been fought.

Start reading here: http://forums.macnn.com/69/mac-noteb...9/#post3754205

[kylef]

Having had my MacBook for almost a month now (and been to lots of places!) the screen is fine where I've been. It's pretty weird: sometimes I'll see my reflection but if you can 'look past it' you don't notiice it at all.

Compared with an old Air I can see the differences though - although from going straight from an old monitor (DELL 1702FP) to the new display - I'm, well, loving it.

[Maflynn]

On a related note, I was debating the MB vs. MBP, when they came out. The dual GPU sold me, but now after using the new MBP I found that the integrated GPU is quite speed even using aperture. so that means the MB would have had the same performance and the MB is a great machine, the small form factor really makes it a great machine to travel with.

[solofx7]

Originally Posted by Maflynn 

On a related note, I was debating the MB vs. MBP, when they came out. The dual GPU sold me, but now after using the new MBP I found that the integrated GPU is quite speed even using aperture. so that means the MB would have had the same performance and the MB is a great machine, the small form factor really makes it a great machine to travel with.

I 100% agree

[Hawkeye_a]

I finally got some face time with the new MacBook yesterday. I'm impressed.

It 'looks' thinner than what you see in the pictures and videos. it actually 'feels' heavier than last years Macbook, but maybe it's my mind playing tricks on me cause it's pretty darn sturdy and 'dense'(weight/volume).

The glass trackpad felt great, and was to me, the star of the product. expose' via gestures is pretty cool.

As far as the display. this was in a store with a lot of lighting, and it didnt bother me as much as i thought it would. I remember when gloss was first introduced to the Apple notebooks a few years ago, it was a problem. It might be because the screen is actually brighter now that it comes through over the gloss. it was a non issue for me while using it. I guess the non-LED screens from previous gen Mac laptops have more of a gloss effect than the new ones.

As far as speed it did seem pretty spiffy (2.0 Ghz model with 2GB of RAM). just launched a few apps and did some expose' and iPhoto stuff on it.

For some reason tapping on the unibody made a 'plastic-iky' sound. but i didnt flex at all, which was good. the body looks really 'clean' and minimalistic.... the way it 'should'.

Between the new unibody MB and MBP..... im tempted to go with the MB just cause of the size/weight/power/price ratios. FW800, dual GPUs and bigger/better screens is sorta outweighed by size/weight in this category for me. Feature wise the only difference seems to be FireWire,which imo is not enough of a differentiator between the two product lines.

Design wise, i only wondered why they didnt put the IR port somewhere in the bezel of the display instead of making a cut in the unibody for it.

Anyway, i think the new MB is a really nice product and as far as price.....i think they should have kept the old pricing in line, considering they havent included any adaptors or the Apple remote in the box.

Cheers

PS>> I think Apple released these new laptops at just the right time. i do expect them to be pretty successful .... despite the economy. Luckily they realize that innovation and great products is the way to get through, unlike the other computer designers/manufactures out there.