[chabig]

Originally Posted by yticolev

Here's an issue no one has raised. I was at MacWorld yesterday and played with a couple Macbooks. Man, are they hot. Sizzling on the bottom. Sure they are "prototypes" and sure they were running a lot of CPU intensive stuff. My rev A 15" 1.25 has never come close to being that hot. So there is a good reason they did not name it "MacLapTop". I don't think anyone could tolerate it on their lap.

I agree about the temperature. They were hot. But then, they were sitting on a flat table, with no room for airflow underneath, they were running continuously at full brightness and full power, and they were under some halogen lights. In actual use, they will probably still get hot, but maybe not as hot as at MacWorld.

Chris

[MORT A POTTY]

not to mention they were plugged in and undoubtedly set to highest (automatic would do the same anyway since it was on AC power) so it was running full force, flat on a table for three days in a pretty warm area.... yeah i'd say it's probably gonna be hot

hell, my pismo pre-upgrade would get warm if it was in a similar situation (albeit for less than three days straight).

[tooki]

Macs with variable-speed CPUs (like the last PowerBooks and the MacBook) do not have the CPU speed setting. It's permanently set to "automatic".

tooki

[Peabo]

Originally Posted by tooki

Macs with variable-speed CPUs (like the last PowerBooks and the MacBook) do not have the CPU speed setting. It's permanently set to "automatic".

tooki

Not true. I have my 17" set to 'highest' right now.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by inkhead

Originally Posted by mduell

I'm surprised to see a single FW400 port instead of a single FW800 port. The Intel chipsets don't support any FW port, so they have to include another chip anyway.

Why do you and everyone else INSIST ON SPREADING LIES? INTEL MOTHERBOARDS HAVE HAD FIREWIRE ON THEIR MOTHERBOARDS FOR YEARS. Not only that Intel makes their very own firewire chipset that is Damn Good, IF NOT A BETTER VERSION than the one Apple includes (yes it's true).

You're confused. None of Intel's chipsets (for example 945PM+ICH7M, which I think the MacBook Pro uses) support Firewire. Here's the chipset block diagram; Firewire is nowhere to be found.


(linked to full size image)

Some of Intel's retail motherboards have Firewire ports. They use a seperate chip from the northbridge/southbridge to support them. That chip may be manufactured by Intel or a third party. My point was that since they have to include the extra chip anyway, I was surprised they didn't make it FW800; it's not as if including only FW400 was "free" because it was already supported by the chipset.

[inkhead]

No, your wrong. Firewire 400 is more than fast enough for video production, you're probably thinking of "professionals" who use LaCie stuff. There implementation of firewire has led you to believe that you need firewire 800 for video work. LaCie makes the worst firewire chipsets ever, not to mention most of their stuff is done on raid array (for fw800)

Second ExpressCard is much more advanced, mac users always get mad when their computer has old technologies, kinda like when Apple kept putting only USB 1 in a bunch of machines that should have had usb 2.

It's good that Apple is using expresscard, in 6 months your be glad you have it.

If you want to be "a real" professional on a notebook (not at the moment) but in the future you'll be doing it on expresscard.

ExpressCard is basically a glorified PCI Express... Which is much better than firewire if you want to do stuff like writing to disks.

Also for things like copying data off a camera Firewire 800 vs. 400 really makes no difference, because the camera stores it on tape, which can't use these speeds regardless. Especially the high end professional equipment.

My arguement sounds weak, because I'm in a hurry to rush out the door. But I work at the studios for a living, and sure we use firewire for mobile video drives, but anything that's done requiring REAL speed is done over sata, or directly off the bus or over network storage. (One of the reasons Apple includes gig-e ethernet)

Originally Posted by chabig

Anybody working seriously with audio or video production won't be doing it on a laptop!

[bcaslis]

No, the very latest PowerBook 17" (with the 1680x1050 screen) does not have a setting. It's permantly on automatic, I have one. The previous PowerBook 17" 1.67GHz with the 1440x900 screen did have a setting you you could change and that is the one you have.

Originally Posted by z0ne81

Not true. I have my 17" set to 'highest' right now.

[SierraDragon]

Originally Posted by production_coordinator

FW800: No big deal considering there are very few pieces of hardware with this floating around. Also, few pieces of hardware could saturate firewire 400.

Actually, no FW 800 is a very big deal. Folks who use a laptop for graphics apps. usually assign a "scratch" disk. A second physical hard drive for scratch makes a huge difference in performance (e.g. Photoshop). With a fast external hard drive FW 400 becomes the bottleneck of the system and USB 2 is not ideal for such use. Photogs shooting RAW also need more capacity than 100-120 GB, so a fast drive connection is important.

No PC card slot may also be problematic. I did not ask at the show because I thought that the slot was a PC Card slot, but it is newer faster Express Card/34, which does not seem to take a CF card adapter, meaning a dongle type card reader will be necessary. A PITA because it is really convenient for a photog to have the adapter live in the laptop. Probably worth it though IF card reading speeds can be improved.

[SierraDragon]

Originally Posted by Nate LFE

...Do you think it's worth the premium for the VRAM and CPU upgrades, which obviously can't be done later? Is it worth it to upgrade to the 7200RPM drive? ...My predominant usage will be for Photoshop and web design with some FCP work thrown in there as well (obviously after March).)

IMO the added VRAM is important for those of us pushing graphics. Apple & Adobe are offloading more and more processing to the GPU, and with laptops' large graphics disavantage (e.g. totally lame RAM of only 2 GB; Photoshop alone already likes 4 GB) we need all the power we can get. Note that a fast external drive for Photoshop scratch will also help a lot.

I too wonder about the faster hard drive. Normally I would say it is worth it but the faster drive is smaller than the (slower) 120 GB. As a pro DSLR photog shooting RAW I find laptop drive sizes very constraining; one shoot may be 10-20 GB of images. Another choice would be to immediately install a faster larger third party drive. I am still trying to figure the workflow out.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by SierraDragon

Actually, no FW 800 is a very big deal. Folks who use a laptop for graphics apps. usually assign a "scratch" disk. A second physical hard drive for scratch makes a huge difference in performance (e.g. Photoshop). With a fast external hard drive FW 400 becomes the bottleneck of the system and USB 2 is not ideal for such use. Photogs shooting RAW also need more capacity than 100-120 GB, so a fast drive connection is important.

No PC card slot may also be problematic. I did not ask at the show because I thought that the slot was a PC Card slot, but it is newer faster Express Card/34, which does not seem to take a CF card adapter, meaning a dongle type card reader will be necessary. A PITA because it is really convenient for a photog to have the adapter live in the laptop. Probably worth it though IF card reading speeds can be improved.

I think those users are much better off with an ExpressCard SATA card and external SATA disks. Even SATA offers about three times the bandwidth of FW800 and doesn't require bridge chips that cut into the actual performance.

Is the width or height a problem for fitting a CF card inside an EC/34 card? If it's only the width, hopefully Apple will put EC/54 in the next revision.

Originally Posted by SierraDragon

heIMO t added VRAM is important for those of us pushing graphics. Apple & Adobe are offloading more and more processing to the GPU, and with laptops' large graphics disavantage (e.g. totally lame RAM of only 2 GB; Photoshop alone already likes 4 GB) we need all the power we can get. Note that a fast external drive for Photoshop scratch will also help a lot.

The chipset used in the MacBook Pro supports 4GB... now we just need 2GB PC2-5300 SO-DIMMs.

[SEkker]

I have been assuming Apple's replacement for the PB17 would include super-pro options like FW800 (which, I have to admit, has been largely lost on me -- a PB17 owner -- because I have most of my external HDs in FW400 cases). There are some other features on current PB17 models (that are not found on PB15) that they could also include in a PB17 "Super MacBook Pro".

In the meantime, Express Card expansion options, a USB modem, a DVI/s video adapter, and even external DL DVD burner seem like reasonable options for that minority of users who need such capabilities. I order the modem because I occasionally use it, but I for one think it was a good move by Apple (and something they've been doing for about a year now on their desktop machines). Believe me, a faulty internal modem is a pain in the neck to fix, it required me to send this PB17 in for repair when it failed. A USB modem can be replaced with a visit to the Apple Store.

[Helmling]

The last time I used a modem was 1997.

[schalliol]

Holy crap, Inkhead, calm yourself!

Originally Posted by inkhead

[FONT="Arial Black"]Why do you and everyone else INSIST ON SPREADING LIES? INTEL MOTHERBOARDS HAVE HAD FIREWIRE ON THEIR MOTHERBOARDS FOR YEARS. Not only that Intel makes their very own firewire chipset that is Damn Good, IF NOT A BETTER VERSION than the one Apple includes (yes it's true)[/FONT]

I swear i want to scream, everybody here is so stupid. "Does it boot firewire??>?~?!~" "Target Disk mode?!!"


YES IT'S A MAC DAMNIT. IT DOES.

[neutrix]

An Express Card 34 eSATA host adapter would be faster than firewire 800 by design. There is a company with one of these products with Windows XP drivers... http://www.lycom.com.tw/EK102.htm .... but not sure if we need native drivers for OSX (I'm thinking probably so). As well, eSATA external drives with USB 2.0 & firewire 400 do exist. This would be the perfect thing for audio & video editors on the go. Only problem is that the eSATA cables are shorter and more fragile than the firewire or usb cables. However.. I don't care... I want the better throughput (than even firewire 800) it would provide.
CHEERS

[Cadaver]

I can't wait for some benchmarks... Since the MBP runs a 30" display, I could see myself replacing my dual 2.5GHz G5 tower with one. I'm not a graphics pro, so Photoshop speed is not important to me (and there will eventually be an Intel-optimized Photoshop anyway). "Prosumer" would be a good way to describe me. As long as office-style apps are fast (Word, Keynote, Pages, Mail, iCal, Unison, PowerPoint, Acrobat or Preview for PDFs, iPhoto, and maybe Aperture), I'll be happy.

I'm becoming less concerned with game performance the older I get... and likely to go with an XBox 360 or PS3 anyway.

An MBP with 2GB RAM, 256MB VRAM, a 7200 rpm HD... sounds like a good desktop.

If performance is close to what I've got now, I'd be very tempted.

[neutrix]

Originally Posted by analogika

I'll just be calling it the "ProBook".

To be honest, I think the "Pro" designation is great, though I'm not too fond of "MacBook", simply because it instantly clarifies the intended target customer. Most people looking at buying an Apple laptop really don't know what they need, so this new naming-convention-in-the-making is a Good Idea.™



I think the point you should be making is that WE don't know what the hell it is...yet.

too many unanswered questions.

What will become of the iBook line? Will it merge into a 13.3-inch MacBook?

What about the external drive booting?

Battery life at maximum power (audio production requires max)?

Will it still run Classic within Rosetta? (Can somebody at MacWorld please relay this question to an Apple stand attendant?)


You forgot the S-ATA drive, graphics card, the ExpressCard 34 slot, the bus speed, and Li-Po battery.

The only specs that are worse are the 4x non-DL Superdrive, lack of ****ing Firewire 800, no modem, and 60 pixels shaved off the display. Everything else is quite improved, including the screen quality. (Just think, you might actually be able to work in SUNLIGHT with this thing! That's WELL worth 60 pixels IMO)


However, having a few pieces attached to Firewire 400 will completely saturate it very easily.

Anybody dealing seriously with audio or video production will have no choice but to use the ExpressCard 34mm slot for Firewire or S-ATA storage.

Unfortunately, there is not one single Firewire card available so far for the ExpressCard 34 slot. Abacom and SiiG make ExpressCard Firewire cards both for 1394a (FW 400) and 1394b (FW 800), but those are all 54-millimeter cards that won't fit in the ProBook's 34-mm slot.



You're an audio guy...most audio pros I know have CardBus/PCMCIA cards (Magma chassis, RME Hammerfall, second Firewire bus, whatever) that they rely upon for their daily bread, and which are now instantly obsoleted the second they upgrade their machine.

That hurts.

(Me, I just need to wait for a couple of drivers, Logic, and a FireWire 800 ExpressCard 34 expansion, and I'll be good to go! )

If you're like me... I think you'd actually rather have an eSATA host adapter for that ExpressCArd 34 slot. It would be faster than firewire 800. I find it hard to believe that hardware developers would ignore making this product for the Apple market. Any serious mobile audio or video editor using massive files on the go would love this product.
And for the last time... the only drawback that eSATA cables have are that they are generally shorter & a more fragile than the firewire or usb ones. But they are faster none the less.

[MORT A POTTY]

no rosetta will not run classic. classic is thankfully finally dead w/ the Mactels.

[ryaxnb]

Originally Posted by Trygve

The lack of FW800 is odd tho... many people are using a laptop as their only machine They could have included FW800 and no 400 sine it is backwards compatible. I think I'll stick with the G4 for now.

I agree about the FW 800 thing, and the lack of modem is also weird. Perhaps they couldn't fit in all the components and a dual-core chip in a 1-inch by under-5.75lb package?

[paul w]

Originally Posted by Cadaver

I can't wait for some benchmarks... Since the MBP runs a 30" display, I could see myself replacing my dual 2.5GHz G5 tower with one. I'm not a graphics pro, so Photoshop speed is not important to me (and there will eventually be an Intel-optimized Photoshop anyway). "Prosumer" would be a good way to describe me. As long as office-style apps are fast (Word, Keynote, Pages, Mail, iCal, Unison, PowerPoint, Acrobat or Preview for PDFs, iPhoto, and maybe Aperture), I'll be happy.

I'm becoming less concerned with game performance the older I get... and likely to go with an XBox 360 or PS3 anyway.

An MBP with 2GB RAM, 256MB VRAM, a 7200 rpm HD... sounds like a good desktop.

If performance is close to what I've got now, I'd be very tempted.

Well supposedly the iMac outperforms all the g5 powermacs except for the quad. A quick look at the specs shows that the macbook isn't too far behind the iMac.

And this only the beginning - good times for Apple laptop users.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by paul w

Well supposedly the iMac outperforms all the g5 powermacs except for the quad. A quick look at the specs shows that the macbook isn't too far behind the iMac.

And this only the beginning - good times for Apple laptop users.

Sounds like bullshi† to me.

[MORT A POTTY]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

Sounds like bullshi† to me.

actually that's not too much of a stretch. the RAM is faster in the iMac, the stock GPUs are much better, the L2 cache is shared.... so yeah, depending on the tast, it could very well be neck and neck w/ the 2.3Ghz 970MP PowerMac. the PowerMacs are horribly overpriced given the (expected) performance relative to that of the new iMacs.

[Leia's Left Bun]

Originally Posted by paul w

Well supposedly the iMac outperforms all the g5 powermacs except for the quad. A quick look at the specs shows that the macbook isn't too far behind the iMac.

And this only the beginning - good times for Apple laptop users.

Oh I just love benchmarking tests next to real world tests.

Seems the intel macs are ASS unless there is some software bottleneck but Steve said OSX was 100% native so that includes quicktime:

http://www.macaddict.com/forums/topic/76536

[MORT A POTTY]

he also didn't mention if the processor setting was at automatic or highest in energy saver default is automatic and i kinda doubt the Apple Store changed it.

unless that is completely absent from the I(ntel)Macs.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by Leia's Left Bun

Oh I just love benchmarking tests next to real world tests.

Seems the intel macs are ASS unless there is some software bottleneck but Steve said OSX was 100% native so that includes quicktime:

http://www.macaddict.com/forums/topic/76536

Great link!

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Leia's Left Bun

Oh I just love benchmarking tests next to real world tests.

Seems the intel macs are ASS unless there is some software bottleneck but Steve said OSX was 100% native so that includes quicktime:

http://www.macaddict.com/forums/topic/76536

Look at his benchmarks... the first three are single threaded and the iMac Core Duo comes within 10% of the dual PowerMac in the last one.

[new_wave_music]

I noticed that this version of the Intel Dual processor is still 32 bit?

I'll wait for the 64 bit revision. Almost every chip will be 64 bit by the end of this year I suspect.
Also wish they would use a Nvidia 7800 graphics card instead of ATI.
make it able to boot XP or Vista and I am sold!

[CaptainHaddock]

Originally Posted by new_wave_music

I noticed that this version of the Intel Dual processor is still 32 bit?

I'll wait for the 64 bit revision. Almost every chip will be 64 bit by the end of this year I suspect.
Also wish they would use a Nvidia 7800 graphics card instead of ATI.
make it able to boot XP or Vista and I am sold!

Intel's 64-bit Merom chip, which is even faster and better than the current Core Duos, is expected to be out in September. That's probably when the PowerMacs will switch, and maybe PowerBooks (er MacBooks) will get it too.

If you want to run Windows, I suggest getting a Dull or Hpee.

[moodymonster]

does anyone know if it uses the h.264 acceleration on the graphics card?

[Simon]

According to ars Merom should be the Yonah replacement in the MacBook Pro, while Conroe is the desktop CPU for the PowerMac. The article also claims the iMac could switch to Sossaman for lower power consumption later in the year.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by moodymonster

does anyone know if it uses the h.264 acceleration on the graphics card?

In another thread on this board a MWSF attendee reports on a new iMac running three 1080 HD movies in parallel with no dropped frames. That indicates the GPU is handling H.264 decoding.

[Peabo]

Originally Posted by bcaslis

No, the very latest PowerBook 17" (with the 1680x1050 screen) does not have a setting. It's permantly on automatic, I have one. The previous PowerBook 17" 1.67GHz with the 1440x900 screen did have a setting you you could change and that is the one you have.

Ah, I see. Well we'll find out how the MacBooks handle it. they might give you the option to change the processor setting like the older PBs.

Anyone who was at MacWorld care to confirm or deny the ability to do this?

[moodymonster]

Originally Posted by Simon

In another thread on this board a MWSF attendee reports on a new iMac running three 1080 HD movies in parallel with no dropped frames. That indicates the GPU is handling H.264 decoding.

oh that's good. I saw a AMD x2 running h.264 the other day under XP and was surprised that is struggling. Then again my PB is a bit lame at doing it as well.

[Geordiekeith]

Ignoring all the talk of Firewire 800, screen resolution, etc. the new Powerbook/MacBook is just why a recently bought a second-hand Powerbook 12" (1.33) to keep me going for a while. I always think of the adage that the best camera in the world is no good if you don't have it when you need it for that once in a lifetime shot. So for me a portable computer must be first and foremost...portable. Admittedly the 15" form factor is not as large as the 17" (which I always think of as something you move around the house but not outside) and these new ones have improved on the thickness, but they are still just that bit too wide/long to always have with you. Try sitting and working (or watching a movie) in a plane or train with one (and I speak from the experience of my 15" 550). Much more comfortable with the 12", and having it also means I don't need a video iPod....

One further point - I was in Paris last week, in a fairly modern hotel (Novotel), and internet connection still had to be made down the phone wires unless you paid for the hotel machines in the lobby, so lack of a modem is also a weakness for me.

So come Apple, bring on a decent 13" replacement for the 12" Powerbook get everyone aboard the Intel transition.

Keith

[SEkker]

I am VERY impressed with the imac's benchmarks. The only machine that was remarkably better was the quad G machine. And the quicktime test clearly shows that Apple is still not yet done with software optimization.

It's pretty amazing, really. Apple can take the new hardware and make a machine that comes close in speed to their standard hardware -- with software that has been optimized for that hardware over many years -- in the past 12 months.

[icruise]

Originally Posted by SEkker

It's pretty amazing, really. Apple can take the new hardware and make a machine that comes close in speed to their standard hardware -- with software that has been optimized for that hardware over many years -- in the past 12 months.

Well, they've been secretly developing OS X for Intel in tandem with the PowerPC version all along, so it's not like they started from scratch 12 months ago.

[uicandrew]

Originally Posted by Icruise

Well, they've been secretly developing OS X for Intel in tandem with the PowerPC version all along, so it's not like they started from scratch 12 months ago.

that would make things go smoothly from the software developing side in terms of making rosetta, but i think optimization for the dual core processors might still an issue.

All the developer systems had Pentium 4. The Core Duos are based off of Pentium M processor (part of the Centrino group). The Pentium M processor was the first intel processor completely redesigned and built from the ground up. All other processors between the original Pentium in the late 90's til now where just modifications from the original.

It might be a couple months still before we see the Intel macs running with full optimization with updates. Besides, weren't there some Mac software that wasn't optimized for the dual core of the G5? At the very least, firefox released recently a G5 optimized browser. i can't wait to see the "dual core optimized" sticker on software.

keep in mind all the software developers had to go on were Pentium 4, they had no way of optimizing for the dual core.

[baw]

Centrino isn't a processor.

[coldfusion1970]

Originally Posted by MORT A POTTY

no rosetta will not run classic. classic is thankfully finally dead w/ the Mactels.

Ah man, bang goes PageMill (the only Mac OS9 app that i still need to run).

[slugslugslug]

Originally Posted by uicandrew

keep in mind all the software developers had to go on were Pentium 4, they had no way of optimizing for the dual core.

Doesn't most of the real optimizing get done by the compilers? Since Apple presumably knew they'd be using Yonahs in the shipping Intel boxes, I would think the compilers in XCode 2.1 already included some Yonah optimizations by default.

[Frans]

Nice discussion here. I think the 15" MacBook Pro looks really promissing when it comes to what the MacIntel has in store when it comes to sheer power. I'm expecting Apple to deliver some stuff the coming year that will package that power into something that the company has always been truly excellent in: designing beautiful, extremely functional and mindblowing cool laptops.

So no, I won't buy the 15" MacBook Pro. I'll be waiting for a smaller & lighter MacBook Pro since I do a lot of travelling. Before I switched to Mac OSX I had a Sony Vaio S-series, with a fantastic 13" screen 1200x800, less than 2 kg (app. 4 pounds), 80 Gb drive and a DVD-burner. That was 2004. Now I'm expecting Apple to make something much better than that this year, I'm calling it the Mac Light....

And yes, I was shocked to see the lack of a modem, and then I tried to remember when was the last time I used it. And well, I couldn't remember....

[roders]

I thought the Macintel Books had Composite and S-Video output via a $20 dongle that attaches to the DVI port.
I know it's not built in but if you've still got the functionality thats good enough for me;
If this is this the case, are people aware of it; or am I wrong?

[Gee4orce]

Lies, Damned Lies and Benchmarks.

All I know is this - the MacBook Pro will be a gazillion times faster than the 3 year old 867MHz 12" G4 that I have now.

I don't need to stinking modem (I don't have a dialup account anyway). I'll use bluetooth & GSM via my mobile if I need to get on line out in the middle of nowhere.

I don't need fw800. I don't even really like fw400 truth be told - I've found it to be finicky and temperamental. No such problems with USB2.0

I can't wait to use the build in iSight for video-conferencing with friends and family.

The large, bright widescreen display will be great.

...and I'll have the most future proof Mac you can currently buy.


Maybe I'm the only person for which the MacBook pro is suited ? Hell - I even like the name, and I've been using Macs since before most of you were out of diapers.

That's why I've ordered one.

[Peabo]

Originally Posted by roders

I thought the Macintel Books had Composite and S-Video output via a $20 dongle that attaches to the DVI port.
I know it's not built in but if you've still got the functionality thats good enough for me;
If this is this the case, are people aware of it; or am I wrong?

The dongle comes with the MacBook for free, you don't need to buy it.

[SEkker]

I think we need a FAQ sheet:

0) This machine will be MUCH faster for the average laptop user than any previous Apple laptop. Many new updates include:
a) built-in iSight
b) magnetic power cord
c) can run 30" external displays
d) did I say it was faster?

1) No internal modem, but a small (and relatively inexpensive) external modem is available for those that need that option. Apple has not been including built-in modems in their newest mac models for the past year.

2) No FW800, but there will likely be an option via an expansion card option; the drivers for this kind of hardware is likely to be available BEFORE all of the key pro software is optimized for intel macs. Until this pro software is available, the most recent G4 laptops will probably be faster in real use than the current combination of hardware and software on a macbook pro.

3) The pixels on the screen (1440 x 900) is the same as included in the original PB17, and slightly less than the last generation G4 AlPB15 to make room for the built-in iSight.

4) There is a dongle option to convert between DVI and s video out, something that will be shipped with the macbook pros (I think that's the latest info!)

5) With iLife 6, external DVD burners are supported with iDVD.

6) The internal DVD burner is NOT DL due to the size constraint of the current machine. See item (5) for options to add this if you need it.

I look forward to field-testing my machine when it comes in!

[aplmd]

While the Macbook is an exciting leap in notebooks for apple, I am somewhat on the fence regarding buying one. I could care less about modem, FW800, no classic, etc complaints posted here. My main worry is the future. Here are my concerns:

1) Intel has really done an outstanding job in the past year regarding there R&D with dual processors, and the next big step going to 64-bit processors this fall with Merom (some say September), which would be inline with when the next MacBook Pro update probably will be (apple typically updates their notebooks every 9 months if you look at the historical data). If I buy one now (which will probably be 8X faster than my 1GHz Titanium), will I be disappointed that there will be a big change in the architechure of the chip design with 64-bit. I guess what I am asking, what will 64bit give me vs 32 bit (besides some improvement in speed).

2) There is not much "universal" software out there right now, and when Powerpc apps rum through the emulator, will that slow the machine down significantly (Instead of getting 8X faster via processor power, I will only get 4X faster).

3) When will the programs that require signicant CPU (photoshop, etc) plan to come out universal. (My guess is that most developers thought they would have until June to put things together since Steve made it sound like it would take a year to get the first Mactels out.

4) There will be some problems with the REV A with a whole new chip design (there always are). Most will be fixed with gradual updates in the software, but I feel that apple has pushed this out maybe "too fast". It had to get something out, and waiting until spring might have been too close to when Merom comes out (now they will get 8-10 months prior to next upgrade, vs 5-6). The reason I believe this is apple cannot even tell us what the battery life is, since all they have is prototypes, and are "tweaking" the OS.

Any thoughts??

[SEkker]

We need to add the list of universal apps to the FAQ:

iLife (iTunes, iMovie, iPhoto, iDVD, iWeb), Pages, Keynote, Apple Mail, Safari

And apps that seem to run fine via Rosetta:
Office (word, powerpoint, excel)

Amazingly enough, the only major app I use that will have this kind of speed bump from emulation is photoshop.

I hear a lot about these 64bit processors scheduled for release this fall -- but none seem to me to be designed for mobile applications. I thought those, basically advanced Yonahs, are not going to be released until 2007 at the earliest. These 64bit processors are going to be great for the power / desktop crowd; I think your comment about timeline is more important for the iMac than the laptops.

[icruise]

Originally Posted by z0ne81

The dongle comes with the MacBook for free, you don't need to buy it.

I don't think we know this for sure. An Apple representative said something like that, but it isn't listed on the "what's inside" part of the MacBook web page on Apple's site, even though the DVI-to-VGA adapter is. The Apple guy from the video really didn't seem like he knew what he was talking about with regard to other things, so I would take that with a grain of salt. However, on the page for the MacBook's detailed specs, it says:

Video accessories: DVI to VGA adapter included (other adapters sold separately)

I don't know what other adapters there would be aside from DVI-to-S-video/composite, so it does sound like there will be an adapter available at least. But I wouldn't count on it being included.

[powerule]

I swear you guys are like babies. STOP CRYING, all you guys do is riff anf raff about any detail. firewire 800 is not a big deal, if you are a real "PRO" you would have PRO gear....

Stop crying already, and to those that bought the lat new POWERBOOK and didnt wait, I told you so....I hope you guys are stuck with that dinosaur soon to be fossil.

[icruise]

Originally Posted by powerule

I swear you guys are like babies. STOP CRYING, all you guys do is riff anf raff about any detail. firewire 800 is not a big deal, if you are a real "PRO" you would have PRO gear....

What does that mean?

[uicandrew]

Originally Posted by Icruise

What does that mean?

based on his previous posts, powerrule also uses a Athlon PC (besides his Graphite G4 500Mhz) so he might be talking about that.

Or he might just mean that people should stop griping and live with the Macbook PRO as it is, a fast notebook with great new features (someone earlier wrote "wtf, where's the new features?"..... ahhhh, ignorance!)

everyone has different needs and i think that they are upset that it doesn't meet their CURRENT needs as a "pro." they're acting as if Apple makes computers for only 1 or 2 types of job descriptions. I mean there are people who work in graphic design, execs who are constantly traveling, or even "pro" wrestlers :-)

I think it is fine to say how it meets or doesn't meet your needs, but i think it is presumptuous to say that your needs are the same as everyone elses. (ie - talking down to members who don't have the luxury of time to wait for Rev B)