[fisherKing]

ok, take out firewire on the macbook, but give us a 7200rpm drive as an option! (and get apogee to make a usb 'duet' interface).
and offer a matte screen option!

okay, none of this will happen...but apple has forgotten the concept of 'choice', and we're being forced to all 'like' the same thing...

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

I wasn't that impressed. I like having a real trackpad button - I don't want to have to rely on touch sensitivity. I am, however, amused that they're making a big deal about "now the whole trackpad is the button" - it's been that way since tap-to-click; what's new besides aural feedback when tapping?

It clicks like a button. It's tactile. There's not just audio-feedback, there's actual movement. View the video.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by fisherKing 

ok, take out firewire on the macbook, but give us a 7200rpm drive as an option! (and get apogee to make a usb 'duet' interface).

You know, I've gotta think the hard drive is almost a non-issue as well. It's dead simple to replace it by hand on these, and it doesn't void the warranty. So why not just buy a 2.5" SATA drive on CDW or PCConnection or OWC or someplace and put it in yourself? It's guaranteed to cost less than Apple's build-to-order option would be (they charge $100 for a 5200 RPM 250 GB drive, whereas a brand new Seagate 7200 RPM 250 GB drive is about $78). And since this is a brand new drive you're getting instead of a mere upgrade, you still have your old drive and can eBay it to recoup some of the cost. I just did a search of eBay completed listings, and it looks like 2.5" 160 GB SATA drives are going for around $50-$60. So your upgrade can end up with a net cost of about $18-$28 (not counting taxes and shipping costs). Or, you can put it in a USB 2.0 (but not FireWire ) enclosure and have a portable external hard drive. Or you can just keep the original drive as a spare. You also get the full manufacturer's warranty on the new drive.

Given all this, I'm unsure why anyone would want to use Apple's BTO option to upgrade the hard drive on a MacBook in the first place.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

It clicks like a button. It's tactile. There's not just audio-feedback, there's actual movement. View the video.

I wonder how much pressure it takes to click the pad. It would be annoying to accidentally click while moving one's finger on the pad, just by putting too much pressure on its surface.

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

I wonder how much pressure it takes to click the pad. It would be annoying to accidentally click while moving one's finger on the pad, just by putting too much pressure on its surface.

Have you tried tap to click? I find it's horrible, yet lots of people deal with it.

I imagine this being a button would lead to a lot less misfiring than that old standby.

[- - e r i k - -]

http://arstechnica.com/journals/appl...cbook-trackpad

The entire trackpad gives tactile feedback when clicking, so when you use your thumb to click anywhere in the bottom half of the trackpad, it clicks just like a button would. (In fact, the top part of the trackpad clicks too, but barely). You'll never accidentally click it while moving your fingers around the trackpad to navigate across your computer. It's resistant enough to not click while you're using it for tracking, but easy enough to click while deliberately clicking.

The trackpad also knows when you are holding onto something, like a window or a folder. For example, if you are dragging a file across the desktop with your pointer finger and your thumb is holding down the invisible button on the bottom, you can let go with your pointer finger and still be holding onto the file. Move things around all you want just like you would on a normal trackpad, and it'll figure it out.

Finally, the new trackpad feels almost identical to the old trackpad; an observation that Phil Schiller takes huge issue with. We were told that he insists it's "way smoother" than the old trackpad. Going back and forth between my original MacBook Air (what I am typing this post on) and the new trackpads seems like no difference to me, however, and it certainly doesn't feel like glass.

[schuey100]

I wonder, can it distinguish between a left side and right side click thus allowing a right click without using ctrl?

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by schuey100 

I wonder, can it distinguish between a left side and right side click thus allowing a right click without using ctrl?

Yes, like any Apple keypad it allows a two finger click.

[schuey100]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

Yes, like any Apple keypad it allows a two finger click.

Don't like two finger gestures

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by schuey100 

Don't like two finger gestures

I presume you use a different finger to right click anyway, do you not? Getting used to the two finger click isn't hard, and it's more ergonomic.

[schuey100]

No, just use my thumb

[- - e r i k - -]

Which is very un-ergonomic on a trackpad for right clicking

[OreoCookie]

You can transfer files via ethernet and wireless now. Transfer via ethernet should give you similar throughput as via FireWire. Sounds like an acceptable solution, no?

[Merkava_4]

I'm thinking a glass screen is magnificent. The days of worrying about scratches are over.

[redhot_nyc]

The glass is far too glossy for me. Anyone else thinking of picking up a matte MacBook Pro?

[PaperNotes]

I'm posting this from the new MacBook Pro in the Apple Store. It's very nice but that glossy screen is too distracting. The Air's gloss is less reflective.

[Merkava_4]

What revision are these new MacBooks and MacBook Pros ? Are they like revision D or are we starting out with a whole new product?

[- - e r i k - -]

Their official designations are MacBook (Late 2008) and Mac Book Pro (Late 2008)

[PaperNotes]

Two more observations.

These new machines have been on the Apple Store floor now for 30 minutes and the screens are covered in fingerprints. The black bezels are smeared with greasy fingerprints that it looks gross.

The glass trackpad painted and is very nice but you better enable tap to click because they are just a big button and are stiff when new.

[phoenix78]

Would have liked to see more usb ports (1 or 2 more), card reader, the adapter cables for vga actually included free, and remote control free.

Would also liked to see possibility to remove the superdrive. Would reduce the weight even more for when im sure i wont need it. If wanted, then could put two hard drives, the second in place of the superdrive.

Would be nice to see dedicated graphics in the 13" MacBook.

But, what a sweet machine. Very decent and i would buy it if i had a reason for an upgrade.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Interesting. It's a LOT cheaper to get 4 GB RAM for the older MacBook. It's less than $60 for 2 x 2 GB of DDR2 memory. Apple charges $150 for the upgrade to 4 GB of DDR3, which is required in the new aluminum MacBook.

No surprise since DDR2 is still a whole lot more popular. In the beginning DDR2 was also a lot more expensive than the previous DDR SO-DIMMs. Subsequently it came down in price a lot. The same will happen with DDR3.

Right now the cheapest suitable 2GB DDR3 SO-DIMM I can find at Newegg costs $61 making a 4 GB upgrade $122 plus shipping (you get to keep the worthless two 1 GB DDR3 DIMMs though). So Apple's RAM mark-up is still there alright, but it's better than it used to be.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by schuey100 

I wonder, can it distinguish between a left side and right side click thus allowing a right click without using ctrl?

Yes.



You chose between bottom left and right corner. Plus you still have two-finger tapping.

[Scooterboy]

I really dislike that very wide black bezel surrounding the screen. I suppose it makes the screens appear brighter but it looks plain b-a-d.

The Pros have a mid range GPU coupled to the integrated graphics. Not even a 9800M GT. So the graphics performance is a mild update. The CPU is about as fast as before. There are fewer I/O options. I think Apple has been overly stingy with the extras on these new machines and here's why I think so:

Milling the cases out of billet aluminium is expensive and has raised their per unit production costs. They can't raise prices in our stagnant economy, so they cut features, use cheaper components, reduce consumer choice. Even after this they've admitted that their margins are still less than with the previous design and manufacturing process.
Machining is expensive. CNC machined from billet custom parts for scooters and motorcycles are very, very expensive compared to parts that are cast or stamped. Apple has decided to raise their costs of production and make cuts in features and use lower spec parts (the 9600M GT, for example). They may very well phase out the 17" MacBook Pro altogether, which will help to reduce their inflated production costs.

I appreciate nice case design, but not when it detracts from the computer that it contains. I do need to upgrade from my 17" PowerBook G4, but I'll be looking at refurbished or possibly a "refreshed" 17" MacBook Pro, or a 17" widescreen Dell with a real "state of the art" GPU, BluRay, and QuadCore CPU and yes, it can run OSX.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by Scooterboy 

I really dislike that very wide black bezel surrounding the screen.

I agree. I think that is the one thing I'd like to see changed on the new design.

The MBP and MB are now both very slim. In terms of weight the MB is already very good. But when working in confined spaces the problem you run into is width and depth. If Apple shaved off that bezel on the MB and MBP these Macs would feel much more compact and fit a whole lot better on narrow seat trays. Best of all the weight could be further reduced (less glass means less weight).

[Cipher13]

Glossy only? No thanks.

The body is beautiful, but man the screen is fugly. Butterface.

[Simon]

Kodawarisan has the first disassembly pics.

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by Simon 

The MBP and MB are now both very slim. In terms of weight the MB is already very good. But when working in confined spaces the problem you run into is width and depth. If Apple shaved off that bezel on the MB and MBP these Macs would feel much more compact and fit a whole lot better on narrow seat trays. Best of all the weight could be further reduced (less glass means less weight).

OK. What?

Are you Jony Ive? Don't you think they have done absolutely everything they can to shave off both weight and volume off this thing? Considered every balance between size, thermal activity and component space?

Or do you just think they threw together this willy nilly, because they quite fancied the black bevel?

[Maflynn]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

Or do you just think they threw together this willy nilly, because they quite fancied the black bevel?

Don't be so short sighted, they liked the black keyboard too

[Simon]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

Don't you think they have done absolutely everything they can to shave off both weight and volume off this thing? Considered every balance between size, thermal activity and component space?
Or do you just think they threw together this willy nilly, because they quite fancied the black bevel?

I'm merely stating what I'd like most to see changed. I didn't imply the bezel was there for no reason. Obviously there's a space constraint and thermal issues. But personally, I'd rather have less bezel than gain 0.05" in thickness. Because for me (and I'm pretty sure I'm not alone here) it's the width and depth that are the biggest problem, not the thickness.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by phoenix78 

Would also liked to see possibility to remove the superdrive. Would reduce the weight even more for when im sure i wont need it. If wanted, then could put two hard drives, the second in place of the superdrive.

Actually the SD is now connected through SATA. So in principle somebody could start selling a carrier that can be inserted in lieu of the SD. The carrier could hold a standard 2.5" 9.5mm HDD.

[dpicardi]

I dissgree. I think the glossy screens look great...but color accuracy is hard.

I didn't get to watch the show...does it explain how you are supposed to get DV video shot into your Macbook without a firewire port? I'm really surprised there is no firewire option in a $1599 laptop...not everyone's gone AVCHD yet...hopefully I'm missing something.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by dpicardi 

I dissgree. I think the glossy screens look great...but color accuracy is hard.

I didn't get to watch the show...does it explain how you are supposed to get DV video shot into your Macbook without a firewire port? I'm really surprised there is no firewire option in a $1599 laptop...not everyone's gone AVCHD yet...hopefully I'm missing something.

You're not... except a FireWire port if you get one of the new MacBooks.

[bbales]

That part is acceptable to me by and large. And I'm just thinking, with my current laptop, I hardly ever use the firewire ports. Mostly I use them to update my iPod, which is an original mini. And in the past few months I've started doing that with my 2007 iMac, instead, just because that machine is so much faster. (And I want a new iPod for christmas -- one of those colored Nanos, and I'm going to assume that comes with USB.)

So the whole firewire might be a non-issue. We have a digital camcorder, but again, video can go into the iMac first. And we don't make movies anyway. I'm feeling a little better about the firewire issue, though I still wish it came with one. I have several external drives and I would say most are Firewire only. Backing up will require a different solution, I think. (But again, mostly what i'd have to back up would be documents, which I'd transfer to my desktop anyway. So this might not be a big problem, either.)

I'll be interested to read people's opinions, as they go to the store to try them out. I may do that myself later. My machine comes tomorrow.

[Eug]

It's definitely NOT a non-issue. It IS a non-issue for the majority of people, but it is a major issue for some.

I think the biggest issues are:

1) FW Target Mode
2) Musicians
3) Home video

BTW, I know several musicians who prefer using consumer Macs because of cost and size.

Loss of FW is definitely not the end of the world. But it's still damn annoying nonetheless. I mean if Apple really wants to separate the MacBooks from the Pros, then they should really price the MacBooks accordingly. Drop a couple of hundred bux off the new MacBooks, and I betcha we'd hear a lot less complaining.

BTW, I wouldn't be surprised if they did this at the next refresh. They'll drop the white MacBook, and decrease pricing on the aluminum MacBooks. Maybe at that time I'll buy one of the latter.

[Phoible]

I kind of wonder what performance is going to be like on the new 2 ghz macbook.

I bought a 2.16 ghz macbook in June 2007 (right after the refresh), and have always disliked the integrated graphics performance (particularly annoyed that I can't play Spore or any other recent games). The new macbook has all of the features that I've wanted to see on the MB for a long time (don't care about Firewire, as I only ever used it to connect my iPod). Having been a consumer laptop user since the dual usb ibook (original white ibook), I can say that this is the best consumer laptop Apple has released since the dual usb, and the first that isn't crippled in the ways that matter to me (graphics performance).

I would consider upgrading to the 2 ghz macbook, but I figure that real-world performance isn't going to be any better than what I have (and possibly slightly worse). The $1600 model is exactly what I want, but costs too much. In a year, the low-end model will probably have those specs (and hopefully a $1000 price point).

Guess I'll just buy a 500GB drive for my current machine, and wait this one out.

[Eug]

DDR3 in the new MacBooks/Pros have much higher latency.

I wonder if this will slow down certain applications significantly, or if it will be mostly compensated for by having much higher bandwidth. My guess is that it will either be a wash, or where memory performance matters, DDR3 will have a slight edge.

[SierraDragon]

Glossy displays are unacceptable to most graphics pros (even matte laptop displays are not all that good). It looks like I better plan on keeping my current 17" MBP for a long time, even with its lame max 3 GB RAM.

The apparent glossy-only direction of this major update to Apple's most important Mac category is bad news for mobile graphics pros like photographers. We were Apple's core strength during tough times but now it looks like sayonara. Great for consumers, but most image pros do not want their displays adding contrast and saturation to their images.

I can only hope that a future update to the 17" {or larger) keeps Macs in the game for mobile graphics professionals with 8 GB RAM, dual mass storage and available matte display.

-Allen Wicks

[Remlyor]

Originally Posted by SierraDragon 

Glossy displays are unacceptable to most graphics pros (even matte laptop displays are not all that good). It looks like I better plan on keeping my current 17" MBP for a long time, even with its lame max 3 GB RAM.

The apparent glossy-only direction of this major update to Apple's most important Mac category is bad news for mobile graphics pros like photographers. We were Apple's core strength during tough times but now it looks like sayonara. Great for consumers, but most image pros do not want their displays adding contrast and saturation to their images.

I can only hope that a future update to the 17" {or larger) keeps Macs in the game for mobile graphics professionals with 8 GB RAM, dual mass storage and available matte display.

-Allen Wicks

Come on guys, get off this 8 GB of RAM kick, look online, there are no 4 GB DDR 3 SODIMMS, and it's very unlikely that and laptop on the market has 4 ram sockets. If you all would rather buy a Dell laptop so be it, bare in mind that should you require service it's Dell, and if you put Mac OSX on it, you can kiss your warranty good bye (unless you buy separate hard drives for the Vista install). If you think OSX will support every feature on a windows laptop you're also mistaken.

[scottiB]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Personally, I think the new MacBook*s look pretty good aside from the glossy screens — all my Firewire equipment is dual-interface — but the best part about the new notebooks is that the old ones are now dirt cheap. Currently planning to order a $1500 MBP with Firewire, a matte screen and 512 MB VRAM tonight.

[insert thanks]
Wow. You're right. I just bought a refurb of the 17" with matte screen for $2100. Never would've looked if not for your mention.
[/insert thanks]

[SierraDragon]

Originally Posted by Remlyor 

...get off this 8 GB of RAM kick...

The gist of my post was about losing matte displays as a choice. The RAM comment was just an aside. However, modern Intel mobile GPUs do allow more RAM and the extra RAM is a huge issue for mobile graphics pros running Aperture and CS4. For us to want access to more maximum RAM is not inappropriate. Supply of 4 GB DIMMs will evolve; the life cycle of a new laptop hopefully is 2009-2010-2011...

Like I said before: I can only hope that a future update to the 17" (or larger) keeps Macs in the game for mobile graphics professionals with 8 GB RAM, dual mass storage and available matte display.

-Allen Wicks

[SierraDragon]

Originally Posted by scottiB 

...I just bought a refurb of the 17" with matte screen for $2100...

Congratulations, great choice!

-Allen Wicks

[Gee4orce]

I just don't buy this whole 'glossy is no good for colour accuracy' meme.

What do you think happens to the light that falls on a matt screen ? It must go somewhere, so it gets scattered. This has a tendency to smear ambient light all across the screen. A glossy display will just reflect it straight back. You can see this if you put some non-reflective glass (ie matt) on a photograph - if can sometimes just feel as if there's something IN THE WAY of seeing it properly.

Of course, displays are actively pumping out light, so the situation is never even as bad as looking at a printed photograph behind glass.

I think the whole issue has got muddled up with the problems with the dithering - non colour accurate displays that have been shipped on the MacBooks (to date) and the iMac 20". The reason these are no good for colour work is because they are crap displays with a high degree of colour shift and dithering - NOT because they are glossy !

Or is my reasoning totally wrong ?

[Chuckit]

For me, it isn't so much about precise color fidelity. Without a carefully controlled environment and lighting (which is a bit antithetical to the concept of a laptop), there's only so much color accuracy you can get even with a matte screen. I hate glossy screens because all the reflections are distracting and give me a headache. It's just harder to work on.

[starman]

Gee4orce, it's about fighting reflections. Yes, you're right about accuracy, but nothing's more of a pain in the ass than trying to get a good CONSISTENT look at an image when you're fighting the lighting behind or above you.

[Kodachrome_Project]

Hello,

I have run a sucssesful stock and advertising photo agency for over 15 years. We now do more in house that resembles a traditional agency in a very high end market in Colorado. I shoot editorial, advertising, stock and fine art. I am well known in the industry and I am the creator and director of a global project involving hundreds of photographers across the globe.

So now that I have set the stage, here it is:

Yes, the matte screens are lower in contrast / saturation, yes the glossy screens are higher in contrast and saturation. No, it is not affecting my or my girlfriend's ability to generate high quality imagery / ads that are press ready with a minimum of adjustments on the clients end.

I use a high end, maxed out Mac Pro as the home machine, the laptop is mostly for billing, patching stock sales from my server on the road and deadline stuff. My girlfriend uses a 24 inch iMac for graphics work, with the glossy screen, loves it, has no problems.

I on the other hand do not care for the matte screens while on the road. They catch glare and flatten out from all angles, while the glossy screens are easier to re-orient to get rid of the glare.

As far as contrast and saturation goes, like any display, there have to be adjustments made. No portable is perfect and you can not expect it to be so.

So honestly, the idea that glossy screens are not being used by photo / graphics pros is total bull.

End of story.

Originally Posted by SierraDragon 

Glossy displays are unacceptable to most graphics pros (even matte laptop displays are not all that good). It looks like I better plan on keeping my current 17" MBP for a long time, even with its lame max 3 GB RAM.

The apparent glossy-only direction of this major update to Apple's most important Mac category is bad news for mobile graphics pros like photographers. We were Apple's core strength during tough times but now it looks like sayonara. Great for consumers, but most image pros do not want their displays adding contrast and saturation to their images.

I can only hope that a future update to the 17" {or larger) keeps Macs in the game for mobile graphics professionals with 8 GB RAM, dual mass storage and available matte display.

-Allen Wicks

[iREZ]

wow Kodachrome_Project, didn't know the word "most" now means "all." I am a prepress artist for an esteemed and very large printer in the US. I freelance on the side. I have used the macbook pro glossy/matte, macbook, and imac. I do like the imac because its an immobile computer and i could position it just so to avoid glares but on my portable...please, no contest here matte is definitely better. although i could live with glossy, it just doesn't make sense when i don't have to deal with it in the first place.

lets take a step back to the mid nineties where lcd's weren't so prevalent. remember those monitors that had an oven hood like device surrounding it to avoid, no not sunburns, glare. matte > glare regardless of what kool-aid you drink in my honest opinion.

i'll be purchasing a refurb mbp with fw400, regular dvi port and what appears to be the last 15" mbp with a matte screen for atleast a few years.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

You can transfer files via ethernet and wireless now. Transfer via ethernet should give you similar throughput as via FireWire. Sounds like an acceptable solution, no?

For file transfer, yes.

Unfortunately, that's the least important concern.

[hyteckit]

Wondering if I can use the new touchpad as a mini-wacom tablet. Would be nice if it's pressure sensitive too.

[EdipisReks]

Originally Posted by iREZ 

. matte > glare regardless of what kool-aid you drink in my honest opinion.

the matte display, by adding a physical layer to the screen, is negatively distorting the actual contrast and color accuracy of the display. it's an unavoidable effect of adding a textured plastic film to a display. in a controlled light room (which is the only environment where close color matching can actually be done [no matter how matte your screen is, ambient light screws up human visual perception]), the glossy screen is quantifiably more accurate. ever notice that really good crts aimed at designers and visual artists are glossy? glossy is the natural state of the display (adding a layer of glass to the front of the screen also negatively affects the image, but well made optical glass, applied as a flat uniform layer, can have a vanishingly small distortion percentage).

sure, the matte display will have less glare if you're doing design work in your cubicle, or on an airplane, or under a tree outside, but you can't do careful color matching in those environments regardless of what kind of gear you're using.

[MartiNZ]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

Wondering if I can use the new touchpad as a mini-wacom tablet. Would be nice if it's pressure sensitive too.

If not, I see them releasing a new external "mouse" based on the new trackpad but bigger, that will allow this.

I really like the fact that after years of people asking for a second actual button on the Mac laptop trackpads, Steve instead took the only one we had away; wonderful reaction .

Good to hear that putting a 7200RPM drive in the MacBook does not void the warranty - what is the reasoning for not having this as a BTO option then though? There's at least one importing vendor here in NZ that is offering 320GB/7200RPM as an option on purchase, which is nice. I'm liking my idea of going down from the Feb '08 MBP to the Oct '08 MB more and more.