Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Hardware - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Mac Notebooks > New MacBook (Pros) are here!

New MacBook (Pros) are here! (Page 6)
Thread Tools
freudling
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2008, 03:49 PM
 
Of course most of us will buy it, and there are some great improvements. But we can still be pissed for:

-crap battery life (still tough to make it through 1 DVD)
-distracting glossy screen
-no quad core processor option
-no internal 3G/4G network modem
-sharp edges (Apple, you rounded the bottom of the case, why not the top around the palm rest? My god, look at how sharp that looks, our wrists rest on that Apple, you idiots!)

http://gizmodo.com/5063492/macbook-a...ro-dual-review
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2008, 04:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by CharlesS View Post
Fixing other people's machines.

Sure sure, you can remove the hard drive and put it in an enclosure, but a FireWire cable is a lot cheaper than a disk enclosure (and more likely that you'll already have one lying around). Also if the computer that needs fixing is something without a removable hard drive, like an older Mac laptop, a Mac mini, or an iMac, then you need a laptop with FireWire.

Soon, the only one that will work is going to cost $2000.
Yep.

Though to be fair, a usable S-ATA USB enclosure is what, $25?
     
CharlesS
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2008, 04:45 PM
 
Sure, but what if someone has a machine that uses a PATA drive? What if someone has a desktop with a 3.5" drive that won't fit in your 2.5" enclosure? You'll need to buy a bunch of different enclosures, which jacks the price up considerably.

And if the machine that needs fixing is an iMac, a Mac mini, a previous-gen MBP, or any G4-based laptop, you're in for a lot more trouble getting the drive out than you would if your MacBook just had FireWire.

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
scottiB
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Near Antietam Creek
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2008, 05:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by CharlesS View Post
Sure, but what if someone has a machine that uses a PATA drive? What if someone has a desktop with a 3.5" drive that won't fit in your 2.5" enclosure? You'll need to buy a bunch of different enclosures, which jacks the price up considerably.
http://newertech.com/products/usb2_adaptv2.php

$35

Godsend, though not as elegant as FW (need a power adapter).

The rest of your quote, I'll agree--I'll never purchase a Mac without FW. Looks like refurb MBPs for me.
     
CharlesS
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2008, 06:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by scottiB View Post
Looks like refurb MBPs for me.
The MBPs are no problem - they have FW800. It's the regular MBs that are disappointing in that regard.

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
seanyepez
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Pleasanton, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2008, 06:16 PM
 
I picked up a new MacBook Pro last night. I was also somewhat disappointed that they did not offer a matte option. However, they had both new and old MBP's sitting next to each other, and I noticed that the new display is quite a bit brighter than the old MacBook Pro display. This helps offset some of the glare concerns. The reflections are still there, but the display can overpower them in most environments.

Overall, I wish the new Pro were lighter and thinner, but it is very well built and quite fast. The battery level indicator is a nice touch, too.

Have you guys noticed that the student discount on the base model is only $100? I ended up going with the upgraded retail model because the discount on that one is $200.
     
Brien
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Southern California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2008, 02:54 AM
 
I'd rather have a higher-res glossy display than a lower-res matte one, yet Apple is still sticking to 1440x900.

It's a bit cramped.
     
Maflynn
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2008, 07:19 AM
 
Originally Posted by seanyepez View Post
Overall, I wish the new Pro were lighter and thinner, but it is very well built and quite fast. The battery level indicator is a nice touch, too.
Agreed and in fact I felt the new MBP was a bit heavy for what I was looking for. I was surprised at the build quality, and weight of the MB, so much so I'm extremely tempted to buy that over the MB
~Mike
     
solofx7
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2008, 09:12 AM
 
Anyone else have the MB or MBP's with any thoughts and or reviews?
iMac 27inch 3.4 i7 16gb ram, MacBook Air 11 inch i5 128gb, iMac 27inch 2.8 i7 8gb ram, MacBook Pro 17 inch 2.66 i7, 4gb ram 500gb HDD Seagate XT,
iPhone 4 - Time Capsule 2tb, Apple TV - iPad 2 64gb
     
analogue SPRINKLES
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: T •
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2008, 12:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by solofx7 View Post
Anyone else have the MB or MBP's with any thoughts and or reviews?
Got my pro on wens. One of the nicest mac's I have ever owned, the metal body is outstanding in terms of feel and quality.
     
tcphoto
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2008, 03:20 PM
 
As a photographer, I was concerned about the lack of FW400 since I own a Canon 1Ds MarkII. I have also edited my images on matte displays for the past 14 years and I only knew of those highly reflective glossy displays. After looking at the new MBP and discovering the FW400 to FW800 adapters, I decided to go with the newer model. I have yet to connect the camera and test it out but I'm confident that it will be an upgrade from my old Powerbook 1.33. I also realized that as I approach middle age that I am not an old dog yet and can learn something new...

www.tcphoto.org
     
solofx7
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2008, 03:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES View Post
Got my pro on wens. One of the nicest mac's I have ever owned, the metal body is outstanding in terms of feel and quality.
which pro did you get?
hmm... i have more questions, but they are escaping me at the moment since i am sick...
why not the regular macbook?
i am trying to justify the money since i have a iMac at home, for the pro that is.
the laptop would probably see light duty, but lots of travel.
i was also thinking of saving a bit of money, getting the better macbook, and then upgrading to the 17inch when it comes out, just because i normally like to have the "godzilla" of computers so they last longer in theory...
iMac 27inch 3.4 i7 16gb ram, MacBook Air 11 inch i5 128gb, iMac 27inch 2.8 i7 8gb ram, MacBook Pro 17 inch 2.66 i7, 4gb ram 500gb HDD Seagate XT,
iPhone 4 - Time Capsule 2tb, Apple TV - iPad 2 64gb
     
Maflynn
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2008, 03:50 PM
 
I keep going back and forth on the MB vs. MBP debate. Ultimately the GPU is making me lean towards the MBP, but the size and weight of the MB is really tempting.
~Mike
     
solofx7
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2008, 04:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by Maflynn View Post
I keep going back and forth on the MB vs. MBP debate. Ultimately the GPU is making me lean towards the MBP, but the size and weight of the MB is really tempting.
I am too, but with a machine at home i can use for gaming, i am not sure if i can justify the $600 to myself.
I am the only one that can tell me no though
iMac 27inch 3.4 i7 16gb ram, MacBook Air 11 inch i5 128gb, iMac 27inch 2.8 i7 8gb ram, MacBook Pro 17 inch 2.66 i7, 4gb ram 500gb HDD Seagate XT,
iPhone 4 - Time Capsule 2tb, Apple TV - iPad 2 64gb
     
Maflynn
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2008, 04:33 PM
 
I hear ya

When I stopped by the apple store and played with both, I really like the form factor of the MB. Very portable and very solid. I picked up the MBP and it was beefy in comparison of the MB.
~Mike
     
MartiNZ
Senior User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Auckland, NZ
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2008, 09:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by freudling View Post
-sharp edges (Apple, you rounded the bottom of the case, why not the top around the palm rest? My god, look at how sharp that looks, our wrists rest on that Apple, you idiots!)

http://gizmodo.com/5063492/macbook-a...ro-dual-review
Interesting point that. I'll be interested to see how that feels indeed. Personally I don't find the old MBP very comfortable, and the plastic lip catches arm hairs just like an all plastic Dell. Gizmodo also suggests that the new case will support one's wrists better for typing, and the suggestions around the place that the machines run cooler are pretty nice sounding in this direction as well.

Anyway, they haven't rounded the top of anything since the clamshell iBook, right? That worked with the overall design of course, but maybe something like that could come in future versions of the new form factor! It's aluminium after all, round it like a drink can.
     
milhous
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Millersville, PA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2008, 02:18 AM
 
Originally Posted by Brien View Post
I'd rather have a higher-res glossy display than a lower-res matte one, yet Apple is still sticking to 1440x900.

It's a bit cramped.
Yeah, I've never understood why they're so conservative with notebook resolutions. They should at the least offer higher-res screens as BTO options on the 15". My guess is that it has something to do with the proportions/dimensions/viewing distance of the system to strike some form of balance.

To have a 15" MBP with a 1680x1050 screen standard with a 1920x1080 option would be amazing.
F = ma
     
Simon  (op)
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2008, 03:04 AM
 
Originally Posted by seanyepez View Post
Overall, I wish the new Pro were lighter and thinner, but it is very well built and quite fast.
I disagree with you on the thickness. I think they're thin enough the way they are. I agree on the weight though. And I sure would like to see it become less wide and deep. The bezel IMHO is too big. And I really have trouble getting over the fact they're bigger than the 15" MBPs they're replacing.

     
issa
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Akiba alleyway
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2008, 04:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by Simon View Post
I think they're thin enough the way they are.
Yeah. For a full-featured notebook, I was already satisfied with the 1.02" thickness of the previous generation. The 0.95" thickness of the new MBP is cool; but I don't feel it needs to get any thinner until real breakthroughs are made in battery technology (capacity vs. size, etc.), miniaturized ports and such. For now, the MacBook Air offers a solution for those who need their notebooks to fit in a manilla envelope.

Originally Posted by Simon View Post
I agree on the weight though.
The weight increase is a true pity, even if it is only 40 grams. I find that weight in my bag matters more and more as I age and grow weary of carting a load. Here's looking forward to the day that an MBP can weigh as little as the MacBook Air.

Originally Posted by Simon View Post
And I sure would like to see it become less wide and deep. ... And I really have trouble getting over the fact they're bigger than the 15" MBPs they're replacing.
Not to mention that the previous MBP had already increased the dimensions (marginally) for width and depth over the 15" PowerBook G4.

In addition to being wider, deeper and heavier, the new MBP also decreases battery capacity by more than 16%, (60Wh –> 50Wh). Regardless of the gains Apple has made in reducing the power consumption of the new chipset, I expect folks won't get as much run-time per charge out of the new MBP as the previous generation without switching to the integrated graphics. The reduced performance may not matter to a whole lot of users. But, at least until Apple comes up with a more elegant solution for the way one switches GPUs, it will be a pain in having to log-out and switch over before pulling that MagSafe cable.
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2008, 04:45 AM
 
Originally Posted by issa View Post
Not to mention that the previous MBP had already increased the dimensions (marginally) for width and depth over the 15" PowerBook G4.
The original MacBook Pro was slightly wider, but LESS deep than the PowerBook G4 that preceded it.
     
issa
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Akiba alleyway
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2008, 05:11 AM
 
Originally Posted by analogika View Post
The original MacBook Pro was slightly wider, but LESS deep than the PowerBook G4 that preceded it.
Well, if I got the specs wrong, then I gladly stand corrected.

However, if the specs shown in MacTracker are correct, then I wasn't mistaken. MacTracker quotes the depth of the PowerBook G4 as 9.5" (241mm) and the depth of the previous MBP as 9.6" (243mm). Either way, the difference is small.

Height x Width x Depth:
PowerBook G4 1.67GHz = 1.10" x 13.70" x 9.49" (5.7 lbs)
MacBook Pro (FEB '08) = 1.02" x 14.06" x 9.57" (5.4 lbs)
MacBook Pro (OCT '08) = 0.95" x 14.35" x 9.82" (5.5 lbs)
     
Brien
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Southern California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2008, 05:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by milhous View Post
Yeah, I've never understood why they're so conservative with notebook resolutions. They should at the least offer higher-res screens as BTO options on the 15". My guess is that it has something to do with the proportions/dimensions/viewing distance of the system to strike some form of balance.

To have a 15" MBP with a 1680x1050 screen standard with a 1920x1080 option would be amazing.
The only other reason I could think would be that LED panels at that screen size/resolution weren't available, but that seems unlikely.

1920x1200 would be nice but I've seen HPs with it and they're almost unusable.
     
analogue SPRINKLES
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: T •
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2008, 06:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by solofx7 View Post
which pro did you get?
hmm... i have more questions, but they are escaping me at the moment since i am sick...
why not the regular macbook?
I got the MBP low end because I have previously had and iBook 13", a Black MacBook and and on both models I found the screen resolution way way to low. If I was just surfing or emailing it was fine but I am a web designer and it was useless in photoshop or aperture. I didn't like the old model MBP because the design was so old so I vowed when they redesigned the MBP I would jump on it. I'm glad I did as it is going to replace my Dual G5 Desktop as well. Once Apple updates the 30" LCD to the new design and features I am going to plug the laptop into the screen and make it my main system. So far the MBP is much much faster than my G5.
     
megasad
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 12:57 PM
 
I played with the new MacBook and MacBook Pro earlier today and they're both very nice machines. The Pro is too large for me, the MacBook was almost perfect, but I think I shall stick with my original plan of buying a MacBook Air when they're refreshed in October 2010. So long as I'm losing FireWire I figure I may as well gain a much lighter notebook. At my desk I have a 7-port USB hub and an external DVD burner, and though I hungered for it in the past, the line-in port being non-powered has meant I've only ever actually used it for playing GameCube games.

Also, in a reprise of my 2003 predictions, by then I hope it will have the following specifications:

- 3GHz Intel Quad Core Processor
- 12MB L2 cache
- 1.5GHz System Bus
- 8GB RAM
- 512GB SSD

And, in the same style as the new MacBook / MacBook Pro:

- Buttonless trackpad
- Battery-level-indicator
- Glass-covered-screen

All for the same price as the current top of the line MacBook Air, of course... Which, with the ~14% higher-education discount, is ever-so-slightly less expensive than it first seems.
( Last edited by megasad; Oct 19, 2008 at 01:26 PM. )
BayBook (13" MacBook Pro, 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, 1TB HD) // BayPhone (iPhone 4, 32GB, black)
     
analogue SPRINKLES
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: T •
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 02:02 PM
 
The main thing that worries me about the air is the slow assed hard drive and low rez screen. If you are just surfing and emailing it is fine but anything else I wouldn't bet on.
     
megasad
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 02:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES View Post
The main thing that worries me about the air is the slow assed hard drive and low rez screen. If you are just surfing and emailing it is fine but anything else I wouldn't bet on.
The cheaper Air, with the 4200rpm drive, I would not want to get as it would indeed be too slow. The SSD version however, at least by 2010, would be at least as fast as a 5400rpm drive, if not faster.

As for the screen, 1280x800 is the same as on the MacBook since it launched and I've used it for many things besides "surfing and emailing". I used to use a 1024x768 display on my iBook and 1152x864 on my eMac and have never found them a problem. Obviously there's not really room for running applications side by side, but with judicious use of the app and window switchers, I've not found myself wanting more space.

Anyway, with the Air, for me, it's basically about foolishly-light combined with no moving parts. I don't need it now, I probably won't need it in two years (my May 2006 MacBook has yet to cause me any consternation with regards its speed), but it would be fun, you know?
BayBook (13" MacBook Pro, 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, 1TB HD) // BayPhone (iPhone 4, 32GB, black)
     
Cory Bauer
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: St Paul, MN
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 03:03 PM
 
I also had a chance to play around with the new MacBook and MacBook Pro at an Apple Store today. Both look great. The trackpad is fine; I started using it without problem before I even remembered that it doesn't have a button anymore. The finger gestures make using a laptop a much greater joy. And I am personally a fan of the glossy screens. Colors are much more vibrant and blacks much richer (both in an accurate way).

The MacBook has a great weight and is plenty peppy, but the lack of Firewire and the noticeably low-quality screen as noted by gizmodo is a dealbreaker. the 15" MacBook Pro was surprisingly heavy; it doesn't seem like there should be that much more weight to it compared to the MacBook. It was also noticeably front-heavy, which I didn't care for. Anyhow, the 24" LED Display was also out to play with, and it looked great. One of those with a MacBook Pro would make for a great little workstation.
-Cory Bauer
[email protected]
http://www.sboobtv.com
     
uuuuut
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 03:52 PM
 
I would really like to access my firewire drive with my new macbook, but have no Firewire 800 to Firewire 400 adapter (9/6 Pin adapter). The apple stores don't have any in stock. Best Buy, Staples, Circuit City don't have them. I know I can order one and get the best deal but.... I'd really rather not wait to get it. Anyone know of stores in Los Angeles that carry this part? Apple should have anticipated the demand and stocked more in their retail stores but... I guess they didn't.
     
uuuuut
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 03:56 PM
 
Anyone know anything yet about replacing the optical drive with another HDD? I heard some chatter about that potentially being possible.
     
CharlesS
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 04:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by uuuuut View Post
I would really like to access my firewire drive with my new macbook, but have no Firewire 800 to Firewire 400 adapter (9/6 Pin adapter). The apple stores don't have any in stock. Best Buy, Staples, Circuit City don't have them. I know I can order one and get the best deal but.... I'd really rather not wait to get it. Anyone know of stores in Los Angeles that carry this part? Apple should have anticipated the demand and stocked more in their retail stores but... I guess they didn't.
I wouldn't bother with adapters - just get a 9-pin to 6-pin FireWire cable.

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
uuuuut
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 04:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by CharlesS View Post
I wouldn't bother with adapters - just get a 9-pin to 6-pin FireWire cable.
I would rather have an adapter because then I could use it with both my 4-6 pin cables and 6-6 pin cables.

If I get a 9-6 pin cable, I will also eventually need to get a 9-4 pin cable.

At this point I'll take whatever i can find though.
     
lpkmckenna
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 07:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by uuuuut View Post
Anyone know anything yet about replacing the optical drive with another HDD? I heard some chatter about that potentially being possible.
The optical drive is now SATA. So yeah, you could remove the SuperDrive and insert a hard drive. I wonder if the USB2 ports of the MBP could power the MBA external SuperDrive?
     
imitchellg5
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 07:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by uuuuut View Post
Anyone know anything yet about replacing the optical drive with another HDD? I heard some chatter about that potentially being possible.
An HDD would be to thick for that area.
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 08:28 PM
 
as pointed out in another thread, a 1.8" drive might work.
     
lpkmckenna
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 09:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by analogika View Post
as pointed out in another thread, a 1.8" drive might work.
Aren't they PATA?
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 09:18 PM
 
     
WizOSX
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: London, Ontario
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2008, 02:31 AM
 
Still no pictures posted of someone's MacBook Pro. Simon's pic above was useful.

But no one has started a picture thread. Usually by now we have box openings, etc. etc.
     
Simon  (op)
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2008, 05:23 AM
 
So according to NVIDIA the 9400M chipset will indeed support 8 GB RAM.

http://www.9to5mac.com/8GB-MacBook-NVIDIA

Yes, an 8GB system can be built using two such SODIMMs after the memory is qualified with GF 9400M.
     
moep
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2008, 05:35 AM
 
Hmm, so even if the chipset does support 8GB it’s still unknown if the computers will.
I think it’s unlikely.
"The road to success is dotted with the most tempting parking spaces."
     
Simon  (op)
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2008, 06:16 AM
 
Yeah, definitely. Apple could limit it in firmware. Or we could again be facing an issue like recognizable vs. addressable.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2008, 06:36 AM
 
Why unlikely? I don't think Apple has added a restriction, the G5s also supported more RAM than `initially supported'.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2008, 08:00 AM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
Why unlikely? I don't think Apple has added a restriction, the G5s also supported more RAM than `initially supported'.
Didn't Apple artificially limit the first generation Intels?

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2008, 08:03 AM
 
No, that was a chipset issue, Apple didn't do anything. The chipset (also of my ProBook) can only address 3 GB. Additional RAM is wasted. Otherwise I'd have installed 4 GB already.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
starman
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2008, 08:11 AM
 
I got to look at them this weekend. First, is it me or are they both a tad heavier than their predecessors? The glare really bugs me. A lot. I realize that with notebooks you can move them wherever you want, but I had a glossy screen on a Dell laptop once and really despised it. I told the guy at the Apple store that the only thing preventing me from picking one up right then was the glossy screen (which was true).

Besides that, it's not a bad machine. Looks solid, moreso than the last models, but maybe someone will come out with some anti-glare thing. In the meantime, I'll stick with my older 15".

Home - Twitter - Sig Wall-Retired - Flickr
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2008, 08:37 AM
 
The MacBook is half a pound lighter than its predecessor (2.04 kg vs. 2.27 kg) and lighter than the 12" PowerBook (2.1 kg). The ProBook is a tad heavier (2.49 kg vs 2.45 kg).

I doubt you really notice weight difference of the latter in real life.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2008, 10:17 AM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
No, that was a chipset issue, Apple didn't do anything. The chipset (also of my ProBook) can only address 3 GB. Additional RAM is wasted. Otherwise I'd have installed 4 GB already.
They actually limited the Core Duo models to 2 gigs. Even in the case of the pre-Crestline Core 2s, the limitation to 3 gigs is slightly stricter than required by the hardware (you could support 3.2 gigs or thereabouts, and Windows does that). I've theorized before that the limitation in the Core Duo models was due to time constraints in the firmware programming - it's easier to simply reserve all addresses beginning with a binary 1 to hardware other than RAM than to try to figure out the exact amount needed.

We're not going to know if the new MBs support 8 gigs or not until someone tries it out. There are good reasons to believe that they will, but it's not certain.
     
Simon  (op)
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2008, 10:56 AM
 
     
tcphoto
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2008, 11:11 AM
 
Originally Posted by WizOSX View Post
Still no pictures posted of someone's MacBook Pro. Simon's pic above was useful.

But no one has started a picture thread. Usually by now we have box openings, etc. etc.
You tube has been filled with video of new MBP owners unboxing their machines.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2008, 11:15 AM
 
Conclusions

Somewhat suprisingly, processor performance is virtually unchanged in the new MacBooks and MacBook Pros; the new NVIDIA chipset and the faster DDR3 memory haven’t managed to help increase processor performance.
     
Maflynn
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2008, 11:45 AM
 
Makes me wonder if something within OSX needs to be tuned. I'm not sure if that makes sense or not but its crazy to see DDR3 memory and a faster FSB getting lower marks then the prior generation. Something's got to be amiss
~Mike
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:58 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,