Oct 14th, 2008 at 5:11 pm
New MacBook
The new MacBook looks cool, though I kind of suspect that paying a premium for pretty design is the kind of thing people become disinclined to do in a recessionary environment. In a larger sense, I’m a bit surprised they’re moving to the aluminum shell. In my experience of using both MacBooks (plastic) and MacBook Pros (aluminum) the plastic shell is actually substantially more durabe. The aluminum ones pick up all kinds of random dents and so forth.
The new MacBook seems to be modeled on the “look” of the iPhone and the iMac more than on the MacBook Pro and it’s possible that that design is hardier than the aluminum I’m used to (certainly the iPhone is pretty durable), but if not this could be a step in the wrong direction.
83 Responses to “New MacBook”
Register
RSSLogin
Advertisement
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Books By Matthew Yglesias
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Abortion
Afghanistan
Basketball
Blanche Lincoln
Budget
Cars
China
climate
Congress
Crime
DC
Demographics
Economics
Economy
Energy
EU
Finance
Football
Gender
Health Care
History
Inequality
Infrastructure
International Relations
Iran
Israel
Media
Monetary Policy
National Security
NBA
Pakistan
Palestine
planning
Political Reform
Public Health
Public Opinion
Race
Regulation
Sarah Palin
Sports
Stimulus
taxes
Technology
Trade
transportation
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Contact Matthew Yglesias
Use this form to contact blog author Matthew Yglesias.
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
October 14th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
Aluminum is highly conductive, so this might help dissipate heat and prevent overheating.
October 14th, 2008 at 5:29 pm
“I’m a bit surprised they’re moving to the aluminum shell. In my experience of using both MacBooks (plastic) and MacBook Pros (aluminum) the plastic shell is actually substantially more durabe. The aluminum ones pick up all kinds of random dents and so forth.”
Apple is very big on this concept. It’s been one of the core focuses of the Second Jobsian Era.
They really don’t want you using anything you buy from them for for too long. They politely prefer you to buy newer versions after a decent interval.
In short, from their point of view, mild fragileness is a feature, not a bug.
—–
Also, I’m a total Apple geek, and this is one of the most lackluster new product design introductions they’ve ever done.
The new features in the MacBooks consist of a snazzy touchpad, and that’s it.
If you’re looking for a decent OS X notebook, the old MacBooks at the new lower price are a better buy than the new ones.
October 14th, 2008 at 5:34 pm
Stick to politics, Yglesias.
October 14th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
“(Planned obsolescence has) been one of the core focuses of the Second Jobsian Era.”
It’s interesting to note that the stuff Apple made at the dawn of the Second Jobsian Era was made to be durable. The Clamshell iBook, for example, was designed to last forever, with generous padding around the internals to protect itself from shocks, soft corners to avoid sharp impacts, and even a handle to keep you from dropping it in the first place. You could toss that thing onto concrete and still not have a problem.
I think it was the iPod experience that really taught Apple the virtues of proactive planned obsolescence. The battery in the initial version was non-replaceable due to some very sensible size concerns, but it made them really think about ways to get folks to re-buy the product more often.
October 14th, 2008 at 5:43 pm
The new macbook is probably the one product that I was hoping Apple would release (a ~4lb, 13″ aluminum-clad notebook with a dedicated GPU and a proposed 5 hour battery life). Their $900 24″ monitor and the $1800 MacBook Air (Err) are jokes, given the price of competing products.
They also refused to incorporate BluRay drives into their products, saying it was a “bag of hurt”. In reality, they are just hoping to further their iTMS (eeeeeevil) empire at the expense of their users.
October 14th, 2008 at 5:44 pm
My experience with mac notebooks is that they are sturdy. I’ve had about 4, they’ve been abused and they survive. They do scuff up, but that doesn’t affect performance. I’ve also had terrific experience with warrantee repairs. Three times I’ve been slightly over warrantee, and they fixed things free. The major factor in obsolescence is software, not hardware.
My way of dealing with this is to try to think of computers as “supplies” rather than “equipment”.
What I like best in the new design is the single-cable integration of the laptop with the new monitor. This is a great way to use a powerful laptop.
It’d be interesting to know McCain’s take on the issue. Perhaps a mahogany shell. Palin would likely push for ivory from walrus tusks. And they’d both say, “This is my plan; not congress’, not Bush’s!!!”
October 14th, 2008 at 5:47 pm
The new features in the MacBooks consist of a snazzy touchpad, and that’s it.
Not so. The weak link in the MacBook from inception has been the integrated graphics. Having dedicated graphics makes the 13in model a compelling upgrade for people who want performance but not the larger form factor.
The old MacBooks are a better buy right now if you don’t plan watching video on them. (I like mine, but the fan runs on full to cool the CPU when you go to YouTube.) The new ones will be a better buy in six months, after the first reset, when you’ll be able to buy refurbs and discounted models at a price closer to the old $1100 floor level.
(One thing though about the new pricing: the base RAM config is finally up-to-spec.)
October 14th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
I was going to say that the two biggest reasons not to buy a Mac is the one button trackpad and ridiculous pricing, but now that I know Petey likes Macs those have fallen to a distant second and third.
October 14th, 2008 at 5:52 pm
For what it’s worth, Apple claims that the new process they use to cut the aluminum housing out of one solid piece of aluminum will result in a stronger and lighter product as compared to previous generation Macbook Pros (and it’s environmentally friendly too). Who knows. I have a year old Macbook Pro and it’s still dent/nick free. Maybe you just need to ease up on your computers Matt.
October 14th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
“The new macbook is probably the one product that I was hoping Apple would release (a ~4lb, 13″ aluminum-clad notebook with a dedicated GPU and a proposed 5 hour battery life).”
It’s just not any better than the old one. The only differences:
- Snazzy new touchpad
- LED LCD
- GPU
- Metal case
- No firewire
Unless you’re a gamer who needs the GPU, it’s not even going to deliver the normal speed bump – the old MacBooks actually have higher clock speeds(!) And it’s not any lighter or any more battery capable.
Vastly underwhelming. Anyone who spends the extra two Franklins on the base new model instead of the old model is a sucker.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
You should watch the video: http://bit.ly/1xNvDH Awesome emo marketing, utter techporn, richly deserves to be parodied.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
“Having dedicated graphics makes the 13in model a compelling upgrade for people who want performance but not the larger form factor. The old MacBooks are a better buy right now if you don’t plan watching video on them. (I like mine, but the fan runs on full to cool the CPU when you go to YouTube.)”
Think about what you’re writing.
The Flash plug-in revs the CPU on any Mac when you’re watching YouTube because Flash doesn’t use the GPU. In other words, the fan will run just as loud on the new MacBook as the old one when you are watching YouTube videos.
The GPU is important for a reasonably small subset of uses, and web surfing is not one of them. Gamers should applaud this revision, not YouTube watchers.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:15 pm
@Petey,
“It’s just not any better than the old one.”
I think you just demonstrated your ignorance of computers.
First, the weight was reduced by about 0.8 lbs, which is pretty nice. Second, the dedicated GPU is a feature which adds about $3-500 to the cost of PC notebooks. It’s also adds a substantial performance boost for anything graphics-intensive (from gaming to structural biology). Third, the LED backlight should increase battery life and typically costs about $100 in similar notebooks with BTO options. Fourth, no one cares about firewire anymore except for professional photographers and mac addicts. Lastly, this is the first time that Apple has offered a 13″ notebook with about 95% of the power of the MBP at about 65% of the price. The 12″ powerbook used to go for $1700 and you can get a new macbook for only $1299.
I could give a crap about the new trackpad, but I think a lot of folks will find it really be a nice addition.
I think the worst thing about the new notebooks is that you only have ports on one side and only have 2 USB cables (it means you can’t run a 2.5″ external drive and a USB mouse/flash drive at the same time).
October 14th, 2008 at 6:19 pm
Adobe has made a concerted effort (as all software companies have) to tap into the GPU. It’s a highly tuned special use processor that sits around for the most part doing nothing. After Effects was the first software package that added GPU acceleration. The new version of Photoshop does. I’m sure that Flash will soon have GPU acceleration (Shockwave has had it for some time). Keep in mind, a new version of Flash (version 10) is coming out with the new Creative Suite and if it doesn’t have GPU hooks, it will soon.
Apple’s next OS, Snow Leopard, is basically a near-ground level rewrite of the current OS, Leopard, tuned (and only available) for Intel processors and with an eye specifically towards multi-CPU and GPU computing futures. So there’s not so much upside to having the improved GPU today, but you will regret buying the older Macbook in six months, maybe less.
The real question is how dropping Firewire from the Macbook will affect sales (it may end up causing a spike in Pro sales. A lot of people still do video work, oddly enough)
October 14th, 2008 at 6:23 pm
ben writes:
it means you can’t run a 2.5″ external drive and a USB mouse/flash drive at the same time
Almost like the original Macintosh all over again.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
I’m not sure what the complaint is here.
Apple is simply unifying the product line, integrating MacBooks with MacBook Pros for a more consistent price/performance ratio while bumping up the specs. As as has been rightly pointed out the video is the key here as the NVIDIA chipset is worlds apart from the Intel integrated chipset of yore. RAM and storage are up; the system bus has increased; cold-start backlit LED uses far less energy while providing a clearer display; DisplayPort is a simple, open-source video connection interface; etc. The argument that this is an underwhelming rev is subjective at best.
For me, the big takeaways are that:
– this is a very eco-friendly computer overall,
– they are adapting their multi-touch tech in smart, user focused ways, and
–this is a smart retooling of what is arguably the best selling notebook in the industry.
I like the fact that the line is starting to look more uniform. It shows how broad a range they cover with a limited range of devices. I also think this illustrates the Apple approach going forward. It is completely unreasonable to expect that Apple can hit a home run with every new product release. As with the forthcoming Mac OS X, shoring up the feature set and strengthening the existing products is the name of the game. Since there are some glaring omissions (Cinema Display range? 17″ MBP? MIA) I expect this is just the beginning but these need to be in the pipeline for the holiday season.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:25 pm
The next Mac OS X release will be able to take advantage of the new GPUs for non-graphics processing.
Per cube’s comment, the $900 monitor plus one of the new laptops essentially gives you one of their flagship 24″ iMacs that converts in seconds to a portable, for only a few hundreds dollars’ premium.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:27 pm
The “one button” thing has been going on forever and I have never understood it. The whole point of that layout is that it’s simple. You’ve got three basic functions (originally, though I will concede the scroll wheel was a pretty good idea), and that allows users to operate the computer without any “what does this button do, again?” This kind of simplicity and elegance has been the whole ethos behind the design of the Mac from the word go, and I guess that’s just the fundamental part that PC people never seem to grasp.
There’s a counterpoint to the pricing issue, too, but I won’t bother.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
@Scrod,
Are you arguing that a second trackpad button is too confusing (more so than say some 2-finger tap) or that it’s not “elegant” enough and would ugly-up the notebook?
I’m in the “the more buttons the better” camp and was always put off by the one button trackpad and all the inelegant work-arounds (lug around an extra mouse, use some multifinger combination instead of your thumb). I’m not excited by the new trackpad, but do have some irrational faith in my ability (if I so chose) to get it work for me reasonably well.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:34 pm
Anyone who’s ever physically interacted with a MacBook Air knows that the new manufacturing process Apple is using for laptops results in perhaps the sturdiest laptop ever built. I will be very surprised if the new generation laptops can be dented without being utterly destroyed. The structural soundness of the MacBook Air is flat out amazing.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:36 pm
I can do the same thing that you’re describing with one of the old Macbooks (or almost any notebook) and a $400 24″ monitor. There is nothing new here.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:37 pm
Complaining about the “one button” trackpad is kind of ridiculous. The trackpad can recognize gestures from one to four fingers. And it can recognize the location of a click. So, you can assign the left side of the pad to one mouse button and the right side to another. It’s really more analogous to an iPhone touch screen than anything.
This looks like a nice upgrade and they kept the price steady. I was hoping to replace my MacBook Pro after the new year. I’m not sure these are compelling enough to make me buy one before the holidays.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:42 pm
As someone else mentioned, the big thing is they carve the case out of a single block of aluminum, so in theory it’s stronger.
And apparently the display is glass, not a plastic film? These are intriguing, but I’m not sure if it’s useful to me.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:43 pm
“Adobe has made a concerted effort (as all software companies have) to tap into the GPU … I’m sure that Flash will soon have GPU acceleration”
Adobe has devoted very few resources to the OS X version of Flash since its incarnation, and I see no reason for that to change in the short-term. Adding GPU acceleration to the OS X version of Flash would cost Adobe some real engineering money, and they’ve made clear that Flash performance on OS X is not a priority for them.
Basically, there is no reason to expect it to happen “soon” when it hasn’t happened over the last five years.
(Not to mention that Apple and Adobe are in the midst of a standards war over Flash that encourages a lack of development on Adobe’s part…)
—–
“Apple’s next OS, Snow Leopard, is basically a near-ground level rewrite of the current OS … with an eye specifically towards … GPU computing futures. So there’s not so much upside to having the improved GPU today, but you will regret buying the older Macbook in six months”
Well…
There has been a real lack of specificity about what Snow Leopard is going to do with the GPU. Maybe it’s going to act in such a way that will show real performance benefit for having a GPU in what are currently non-GPU functions. Or maybe not.
Buying the new model will definitely get you a slightly slower computer over the next six months, and may or may not get you a slightly faster one after that.
But on the other hand, it’s costing you three extra Franklins, (not the two extra I mentioned above.) That means you are shelling out 30% more for a dubious future benefit. The correct decision for most buyers is to take the three Franklins, unless you have valid current use for a GPU. (And a lot of folks who think they have a current use for a GPU really don’t…)
—–
For my part, I think the snazzy new trackpad is honestly snazzy. That would be my only reason for buying the new over the old, but it ain’t $300 worth of good.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
“the weight was reduced by about 0.8 lbs, which is pretty nice.”
I was not aware of that. If true, it is a real advantage.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:47 pm
Here is how to use a Macintosh. Your left hand rests in the home position on the keyboard and is used to hit the Command, Control, Option, and Shift keys. Your right button goes on the mouse. You have five basic clicks (click, command-click, control-click, option-click, shift-click). And then there are chorded clicks in more complex programs. Drag variations. Double-click variations. Click and hold drags. Etc.
If you master this you can work very efficiently. It is much faster to use a chorded key combination with a mouse action than to select an option from the right menu when you finish an action. Programs like PhotoShop or InDesign make full use of all the possible complications allowing professional graphic designers to work very fast. Plus, your left hand is always on the keyboard to trigger the ubiquitous menu commands.
The Macintosh is not so much simple because it has one mouse button as it is vastly complex because you use your left hand for chorded shortcuts in concert with the mouse.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:49 pm
@Ben
I guess what I’m getting at is that there’s simply a difference in philosophy there. For macs, especially early on, they made a point of being more intuitive. Hence, one button. it does this. click. It’s not like I’m saying mac users are dumb and can’t figure out that tricky second button, it’s just that the one button mouse is not a “figure it out” thing, just a simple tool that even my 8-year-old self knew how to handle it after thirty seconds of using a Mac SE. PC people tend to want a button for everything, many as they can get.
There are certainly advantages to PC over mac, but the “one button mouse” as lead-off hitter in the great debate always seemed strange to me.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:54 pm
“The real question is how dropping Firewire from the Macbook will affect sales (it may end up causing a spike in Pro sales. A lot of people still do video work, oddly enough)”
Also, Macs can boot the ‘puta for service reasons via a Firewire HD or computer, while USB HD’s can’t boot the system…
October 14th, 2008 at 6:56 pm
How about that Silverlight 2 was released today so now there’s a real competitor chomping at Flash’s heals?
October 14th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
I can boot my PC off of a USB HDD (or a USB flash drive/DVD drive). Are you saying that Macs can’t or that my PC can’t?
USB drives are also substantially cheaper and easier to find than firewire drives with very similar transfer rates.
October 14th, 2008 at 7:02 pm
Macs work with 2-button mouses just fine. Just plug in a “normal” mouse and boom. Apple corporate hq sticking with the one button thing is retarded – like many of apple’s decisions. I say this as a mac owner – if you don’t have a profession or hobby that requires a mac, get a pc. Half the cost for twice the functionality for a typical user. The price premium for a mac versus what a mac actually gives you is ridiculous.
But yes, they look great.
October 14th, 2008 at 7:04 pm
“How about that Silverlight 2 was released today so now there’s a real competitor chomping at Flash’s heals?”
I think Silverlight is going to have very low market penetration on OS X for the foreseeable future.
Silverlight will likely encourage Adobe to invest in Flash performance on Windows, but not so much on OS X. (Though the situation could change a few years down the line if Mister Softee successfully throws really big bucks into making Silverlight a default standard, though they’ve been lousy at accomplishing those things for the past decade…)
And don’t discount how much the cold war Adobe and Apple are fighting over Flash will result in Adobe underinvesting in OS Flash as retribution. I think that’s no small part of the reason why Flash sucks on OS X right now.
October 14th, 2008 at 7:11 pm
This is fun. Petey’s been trying to argue that the GPU upgrade (and dedicated GPUs in general) aren’t worth much. In fact, they are about the only piece of hardware differentiating the Macbook and Macbook Pro lines the last few years.
Petey knows as much about computers as he does about politics.
October 14th, 2008 at 7:16 pm
“This is fun. Petey’s been trying to argue that the GPU upgrade (and dedicated GPUs in general) aren’t worth much. In fact, they are about the only piece of hardware differentiating the Macbook and Macbook Pro lines the last few years.”
The GPU is a big deal for a small subset of users. If you’re a gamer, or if you spend a lot of time in an app that draws thousands of thumbnails – aka iPhoto or Aperture – then GPU’s do matter.
But the real difference for most users between the MB and the MB pro has been the availability of larger screen sizes. Those folks who bought the 12″ MB pro have mostly been suckers.
October 14th, 2008 at 7:29 pm
Well, here’s the problem. The Mac OS, and in fact the entire Apple experience, is intuitive for a certain kind of person. Artists, fashion mavens, scientists, and other creative personalities can sit down with a 13-inch MacBook running Leopard and comprehend its sensitive, tasteful aesthetic. It’s a rare instinct, this appreciation for beauty and truth; unimaginative, dogma-bound drones haven’t a prayer.
In summary, unattractive squares should stick to Linux and Windows. Macs are for different thinkers.
October 14th, 2008 at 7:36 pm
Moreso than any economic downturn, it seems like the tide is shifting away from Apple as people realize they’re paying a huge premium for what’s essentially a DRM-ed PC. More and more Mac users are finding out that not only does Apple make a huge profit on the initial sale, but they also use their monopoly position and closed standards to run up huge markups on hardware and software.
One of my friends recently found out he’d have to spend $250 to upgrade his macbook to a modest 1GB of RAM (about 3-5 times more expensive than the upgrade would be on a PC) and swore he’d never buy another Apple in the future.
Meanwhile I’m stuck with them for Final Cut Pro. If Apple ever wises up and buys Adobe, we’re gonna be stuck with them forever.
And I can’t speak for everyone, but my XP notebook NEVER crashes.
October 14th, 2008 at 7:37 pm
But the real difference for most users between the MB and the MB pro has been the availability of larger screen sizes.
In the PC world (before the advent of netbooks) the cheapest notebooks had 15″ screens. You had to pay a premium for notebooks with 12″ or 13″ screens. Most of the $400 notebooks had 15.4″ screens while the 13″ notebooks cost $15-2500. The larger screens don’t cost the manufacturer that much more to produce (and may, in fact, be cheaper due to some arcane feature of the fabrication process).
While Apple charged more for their 15″ notebook than their 13″ notebook, this is a function of their product marketing and not a product of their manufacturing costs. The major differences between the “pro” and “consumer” lines were the aluminum chassis and the dedicated GPU. These features were responsible for a ~$1000 difference in price between the two lines.
Those folks who bought the 12″ MB pro have mostly been suckers.
Or they valued portability over a little extra screen size and didn’t subscribe to the “more bigger is more better” philosophy of computer buying. While I’d rather have portability than power, I’d really like both (and as cheaply as possible). Does that make me a sucker?
October 14th, 2008 at 7:41 pm
lol, I didn’t catch the snark at first. you really have a talent for douchebag-speak.
October 14th, 2008 at 7:44 pm
Ben, don’t you have a USB hub? You’re right, though, Mac never has had enough USB ports. My hubs have hubs, so the desk looks like a spaghetti factory.
Scrod, what advantage does a PC have over a Mac? My MacBook Pro 17 with Leopard runs Windows just fine (even though I hate Windows, sometimes a woman’s gotta do what a woman’s gotta do).
I didn’t like that the Intel chip required updating a lot of peripherals and software, but I ought to have done it anyway.
I’m an unreconstructed MacAddict–and I even have my Apple IIC around here somewhere…
October 14th, 2008 at 7:49 pm
The GPU is a big deal for a small subset of users.
Even if the (apparently) large number of users don’t realize it, a dedicated GPU is a big deal. Graphics of any kind involve a massive level of data-crunching, if you were to relieve your main CPU of that burden, wouldn’t it stand to reason that your machine would run better overall? Also, by using dedicated GPU DDR-RAM, you relieve your system memory of that additional burden, & again, improved overall system performance.
October 14th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
Ben, don’t you have a USB hub?
No. My “main” notebook (a 14″ ASUS A8jm) has 5 USB ports so I can plug in stuff wherever I want (left, right or back) or charge my phone and my mp3 player while transferring files from a 2.5″ HDD (which takes up 2 ports) to a flash drive if I want to. My cheapo $450 netbook (10″ ASUS 1000H) has 3 USB ports and a card reader. I don’t like carrying around extra doodads and thingamajigs that I have to buy, organize, carry around, unpack/repack and try not to lose. I like to keep things simple.
You can never have too many USB ports. They’re cheap for the manufacturer to install and it makes connecting USB devices a lot more convenient.
October 14th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
One of my friends recently found out he’d have to spend $250 to upgrade his macbook to a modest 1GB of RAM…
Nonsense. A RAM upgrade is considered, under Apple’s warranty, a “user install”, meaning if you were to by some Kingston RAM (4gb RAM kit@ around $120.00Cdn) & installed it yourself, you wouldn’t be voiding the warranty.
I don’t know who your “friend” is talking to, be he/she is getting hosed.
October 14th, 2008 at 7:58 pm
never buy the first generation of a new product. Wait until the update in a year so the bugs get worked out. The close out old macbooks pro’s look like a deal now.
Overall the new computers look like a strong line up. While not very exciting they look like fine apple products.
October 14th, 2008 at 8:24 pm
Hey Petey– there’s a program called SuperDuper that perfectly mirrors Mac HD, and allows bootups off of USB. I use it all the time. It is not as fast, but if you can’t get to your Mac HD (hardware meltdown, theft, etc.), you don’t care about speed, you just want your duplicate data.
Along to economics– I don’t see any reason why Apple will suffer through an impending recession any worse than other electronics makers. I didn’t buy my Mac because I wanted to throw away extra money– I bought it because its capabilities relative to its price far exceeded what I could buy in a PC version. To buy a PC laptop that offers all a MacBook offers costs $$$. Such capability won’t come with a $500 Dell.
Hey fletc3her– well written about the trackpad/function key relationship.
October 14th, 2008 at 9:25 pm
Petey is confused. G5 Macs will not boot off USB drives, but Intel ones (including these new MacBooks) will.
October 14th, 2008 at 9:29 pm
a huge premium for what’s essentially a DRM-ed PC.
Uh-huh. Alternatively, you can say that it’s essentially a solid UNIX-based system with an extremely nice display layer. It’s an exceptionally well-suited tool for research-heavy writing, and that’s before you get into the graphics/design/AV stuff.
One of my friends recently found out he’d have to spend $250 to upgrade his macbook to a modest 1GB of RAM
Your friend could have looked at the approx. 14,000,000 websites that tell you to buy aftermarket RAM.
October 14th, 2008 at 9:55 pm
I’m not running the beta of Flash 10, but I’ll install it as soon as it ships in final form, but one of the big focuses of Flash 10 was substantially improving performance on the Mac. According to Adobe’s engineers (Who blog on a regular basis over at blogs.adobe.com), Mac performance has always been a complaint and Flash 10 made significant effort to address that. If Gartner’s estimates are correct, then Macs are nearly 10% of the computer market now, a big chunk, and in particular a chunk that has money and is far more computer-media savvy. Adobe wants people using Flash for video online (they made a big deal about Joost transitioning from a software download model to a Flash model this week) and Mac users represent a big portion of video consumption, more than the number of systems sold would indicate.
As for GPU performance, figure that this is an area of development where companies have just started putting engineering talent. There’s not a whole lot of additional CPU performance to be gained, but since everyone is starting from close to zero with GPU performance gains, you’re liable to see some pretty impressive system improvements with the added engineering expertise. We’re just scratching the surface of what can be done and Nvidia in particular has put in a lot of time and effort to make the GPU the next performance hotspot.
If all you do is write emails and check thinkprogress, then you won’t see much difference between new and old Macbooks. But figure more and more websites are implementing Flash or Silverlight (and with advertisers getting stingier, we’re liable to see MORE Flash, not less), you’re going to need a fairly beefy computer to just surf the web soon. For better or worse.
October 14th, 2008 at 10:42 pm
Good one, and probably well-deserved.
But I was trying to make the opposite point: that the one button is intuitive to everyone (not certain types of people (I honestly didn’t think that would have to be expressed. Thought the term “intuitive” was inclusive enough.) I was just trying to mount a defense against the “one-button” argument, not praising macs nor decrying pcs.
October 14th, 2008 at 11:02 pm
Scrod, the single button may indeed be more intuitive when you’re trying to teach your 80-year-old uncle how to send an email. But once you get past the barest of bare-bones computer literacy, it becomes not only unintuitive but positively cumbersome. There is nothing convenient, elegant, pure, or grokkable about “command-clicking.”
As for the gesture-based trackpad, I can tell you right now that it’s a scam, and that nothing is more frustrating than repeatedly raping one’s Photoshop project because your fingers were a little too close to the right side of the pad, or you made a vaguely downward-facing graze somewhere in the middle.
October 14th, 2008 at 11:16 pm
I’m probably arguing in poetry while flec3her is arguing in prose here, so I direct you to his well-made points. As for intuitive vs. unintuitive, I would direct you to the definition of “intuitive.”
October 15th, 2008 at 12:09 am
“There are certainly advantages to PC over mac, but the “one button mouse” as lead-off hitter in the great debate always seemed strange to me.”
This is why Petey’s love of Macs is now my lead off hitter…
October 15th, 2008 at 1:23 am
Dudes and dudettes, I say again with emphasis:
YOU CAN USE A NORMAL “TWO BUTTON” MOUSE ON A MAC JUST FINE.
October 15th, 2008 at 2:32 am
@max hats,
If you decide to use a mouse with a notebook, you have to (1) purchase a mouse, (2) lug that mouse around (find a place in your backpack, make sure not to lose it, unpack it/repack it, etc) and (3) your mouse movements take your hands away from the keyboard, making it a very inefficient form of input.
You shouldn’t have to purchase additional devices to make your computer perform the basic tasks it is designed for. It doesn’t cost Apple any more to add an additional mouse button, they just choose not to because they are righteously pompous assholes.
October 15th, 2008 at 2:41 am
The GPU is a big deal for a small subset of users. If you’re a gamer, or if you spend a lot of time in an app that draws thousands of thumbnails – aka iPhoto or Aperture – then GPU’s do matter.
A “small subset”?! Tell me you’re kidding, please. Gamers (the gaming industry rakes in about as much as Hollywood does every year), amateur photographers and videographers (another huge market) and professional visual artists and web designers, as well as all the hobbyists in the field, make up a huge percentage of the market and they all rely on GPU power.
Artists, fashion mavens, scientists, and other creative personalities can sit down with a 13-inch MacBook running Leopard and comprehend its sensitive, tasteful aesthetic.
You’re not going to get very far as an artist using a 13-inch Macbook, which has integrated graphics, shared memory and a small screen, no matter how much it might appeal to your sense of aesthetics.
October 15th, 2008 at 4:20 am
“Even if the (apparently) large number of users don’t realize it, a dedicated GPU is a big deal. Graphics of any kind involve a massive level of data-crunching, if you were to relieve your main CPU of that burden, wouldn’t it stand to reason that your machine would run better overall?”
Well, no.
For most users, almost 0% of the time spent at their computer is speeded up by having a dedicated GPU. Some of the activities that a GPU won’t speed up even a little are web surfing (including watching video in a web browser), email, word processing, the Finder, and iTunes.
There are a pretty limited subset of real world situations in which having a GPU will make a difference in speed from a user’s viewpoint. Most notably among these is gaming, since the FPS improvement can make the difference between acceptable and non-acceptable experiences. Another is if you are regularly spending time with several thousands of thumbnails in iPhoto or Aperture, where not having a GPU will make the CPU choke and slow down the user experience in measurable ways. Another is certain aspects of video authoring work.
But for most other tasks, the CPU isn’t normally maxed out, and can handle the very limited duty of drawing to the screen just as well as a GPU from the human perspective. Basically, a GPU isn’t a “make my computer go faster” answer for most people.
—–
“Those folks who bought the 12″ MB pro have mostly been suckers. — Or they valued portability over a little extra screen size and didn’t subscribe to the “more bigger is more better” philosophy of computer buying. While I’d rather have portability than power, I’d really like both (and as cheaply as possible). Does that make me a sucker?”
Probably, yes. It does make you a sucker.
The alternative to buying a 12″ MB pro wasn’t buying a larger MB pro. It was buying a regular old MacBook.
Aside from a pretty small subset of folks who could actually make use of the additional features of the MB pro, most of the folks who bought the 12″ MB pro were chasing after some illusory “power” that was of no actual use to them. And they spent big additional bucks for the illusion. Or in other words, they were suckers.
October 15th, 2008 at 4:26 am
Right now I’m typing on a four year old 15″ 1.67GHz G4 Powerbook with 2MB of Ram, and it’s working beautifully. With enough Ram, in my experience any Mac from the G3s forward will hold together really well. As a survivor of the Quadra Performa days, I’ve been pretty easy to please for a long time. The trackpads can start to get squirrelly on the G4 Powerbooks, but I think a graphics tablet is better anyway.
Earlier commenter is right about the old clamshells too. Old clamshells with a RAM upgrade and white ibooks (600MHz G3s can be had now for $200) are a good alternative to the $100 laptop for schools.
October 15th, 2008 at 5:36 am
There are a pretty limited subset of real world situations in which having a GPU will make a difference in speed from a user’s viewpoint.
So you’ve gone from a “small subset” to a “pretty limited subset”, but you’re still wrong: There are 10 million WoW subscribers alone who benefit from GPU enhancements, feel free extrapolate from that number. Everybody and their dog owns a digital camera now that can easily store thousands of pictures – viewing them as thumbnails is essential and a very basic process that is sped up by GPUs. Also, doing basic image corrections has become a commonplace task, my 70+ year aunt does it all the time. Digital Video editing is not confined to professionals anymore, people edit anything and everything now, from their mobile phone videos, clips to put on youtube to wedding videos and short films.
Furthermore, the future of computing power is in parallel processing and more specifically stream processing and in that GPUs, or rather GPGPUs, play a significant role. Also, the boundaries between CPU and GPU are beginning to blur.
October 15th, 2008 at 6:04 am
“doing basic image corrections has become a commonplace task, my 70+ year aunt does it all the time.”
Not something a GPU is going to speed up.
“Digital Video editing is not confined to professionals anymore, people edit anything and everything now, from their mobile phone videos, clips to put on youtube to wedding videos and short films.”
Almost everything you do in the kind of rudimentary digital video editing you describe is not going to be sped up by a GPU. The real time hit for is spent in rendering, and that’s a CPU exclusive activity.
—–
“Also, the boundaries between CPU and GPU are beginning to blur.”
Sure, but that beginning is not even yet beginning to happen. We may well be living in a computing universe in 5 years time where a GPU will noticeably speed up ordinary computing. But you’ll highly likely be using a new laptop in 5 years’ time anyway.
The reality remains the same. If you’re doing 3-D gaming on your Mac, buy one with a GPU. (Most gamers use dedicated consoles, FWIW.) If you’re spending more than a couple of hours a week in iPhoto or Aperture with thousands of photos, buy a Mac with a GPU.
But the huge bulk of folks are better off with the three Franklins in their pocket and integrated graphics in the ‘puta. You can use those three Franklins to upgrade to the next hot Mac 18 months from now. 30% extra cost is not chicken feed when most folks will get absolutely no extra benefit.
October 15th, 2008 at 7:08 am
Not something a GPU is going to speed up.
Wrong. Photoshop CS4 is out now and features GPU acceleration.
Almost everything you do in the kind of rudimentary digital video editing you describe is not going to be sped up by a GPU.
Wrong again, at almost every level of editing the vast majority of time is spent on sifting through the footage, chopping it up into clips and assembling them.
Sure, but that beginning is not even yet beginning to happen. We may well be living in a computing universe in 5 years time where a GPU will noticeably speed up ordinary computing.
Intel’s Nehalem and AMD’s Fusion will come out next year.
October 15th, 2008 at 7:31 am
“Wrong. Photoshop CS4 is out now and features GPU acceleration.”
Your 70+ year aunt is going to spend $700 to be using Photoshop CS4 in the next 18 months? Not to mention that most of what Photoshop CS4 speeds up via GPU has to do with 3-D rendering, which isn’t going to be in your 70+ year aunt’s toolkit even if she were using the software. We’re not talking about red-eye correction here…
“Wrong again, at almost every level of editing the vast majority of time is spent on sifting through the footage, chopping it up into clips and assembling them.”
But a Mac w/out a GPU isn’t going to be noticeably less responsive in accomplishing those tasks than a Mac with a GPU, of course.
—–
Look, if you are a professional photographer or a professional videographer who spends many hours a week in Final Cut Pro or Aperture and Photoshop CS4, spending an extra 30% to get a GPU is going to make very good sense. I’m not arguing otherwise. I keep saying the vast bulk of users won’t see any benefit from a GPU, not that all users won’t. In an almost identical vein, the vast bulk of users are wasting their money if they load up with more than 2GB of RAM, but there are certain edge cases where it makes very good sense to get more RAM than that.
I understand that the English are a stupid people, novakant, but there is no reason for you to try to set the bar so especially low…
October 15th, 2008 at 8:13 am
But a Mac w/out a GPU isn’t going to be noticeably less responsive in accomplishing those tasks than a Mac with a GPU, of course.
A Mac without a GPU would be rather unresponsive because you wouldn’t be able to see much on your monitor.
October 15th, 2008 at 10:04 am
I think you all are being way too hard on Petey here. His point that gamers and video pros need a hefty GPU while the rest of us don’t seems valid to me.
My laptop has *both* integrated and dedicated gpus and I never use the dedicated card any more. I tried it for a while but could never perceive any difference in performance…the only impact was the battery drained much faster. I do a lot of programming work and for compiling code and running VMs a dedicated GPU isn’t really that important.
October 15th, 2008 at 10:07 am
I think people in this thread are using the term “GPU” as synonymous with “dedicated GPU” as opposed to “integrated”.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:08 am
Fourth, no one cares about firewire anymore except for professional photographers and mac addicts.
Simply not true. It’s an enormous problem for video professionals, who constitute a very significant percentage of Apple’s market. Virtually every digital Video camera and deck on the market has a firewire interface, and most production studios have large investments in external firewire storage, though eSATA is clearly the wave of the future.
I really don’t understand this move by Apple, and predict that it will be an Achilles heel for the new product line, but a boon to manufacturers of firewire adapters.
October 15th, 2008 at 11:16 am
“I really don’t understand this move by Apple”
Apple would politely prefer you to spend an extra seven Franklins to purchase a MacBook Pro. Upselling is the one and only reason the port is gone.
And it’s not just video folks who are getting screwed. Lots of music folks are also dependent on Firewire. Not to mention folks who want fast external HD’s that can also act as reliable boot disks…
October 15th, 2008 at 11:55 am
It’s reassuring to know that Petey is just as certain and wrong about technical issues as he is about political ones. Odd that a ‘total Mac geek’ doesn’t realize that Macs have been able to boot from USB since 2006. So it goes…
October 15th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
novakant writes:
Also, the boundaries between CPU and GPU are beginning to blur.
This is probably wishful thinking. I heard a presentation recently about the Intel Larrabee GPU. In response to a question about GPUs replacing CPUs at some point in the future the Intel guy said it won’t happen because the core tasks of the two processors are so different. CPUs and GPUs may both be processor chips but they are designed and optimized for two significantly different tasks.
October 15th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
Me: “Fourth, no one cares about firewire anymore except for professional photographers and mac addicts.”
You: “It’s an enormous problem for video professionals, who constitute a very significant percentage of Apple’s market.”
It’s like you can’t even read English.
The only people that care about this change are people who use expensive cameras for a profession (photographers, videographers, whatever) and people who invested way too much time, money and interest in Apple.
October 15th, 2008 at 1:47 pm
Not to mention folks who want fast external HD’s that can also act as reliable boot disks…
The USB-based alternatives are both (1) cheaper, (2) easier to find, (3) compatible with far more computer systems and offer pretty much the same performance (FW400 vs USB2.0).
October 15th, 2008 at 1:58 pm
“It’s reassuring to know that Petey is just as certain and wrong about technical issues as he is about political ones. Odd that a ‘total Mac geek’ doesn’t realize that Macs have been able to boot from USB since 2006. So it goes…”
Have you actually tried to USB boot OS X? Or even googled the topic?
USB booting OS X is indeed theoretically feasible, but in practice it often doesn’t work, and when it does work, it can take upwards of 30 minutes to boot, and leaves you a system that is close to unusably slow and highly prone to kernel panics. Contrast to Firewire booting that is reliable enough for your grandmother to do, and almost as fast as internal HD booting.
Not to mention that removing Firewire ports causes the total loss of anything like the incredibly useful Target Disk Mode.
MacBooks w/out Firewire are at an incredibly serious disadvantage for both diagnostics and emergency data transfer.
October 15th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
“The only people that care about this change are people who use expensive cameras for a profession (photographers, videographers, whatever) and people who invested way too much time, money and interest in Apple.”
A large percentage of consumer video cameras sold over the past decade use Firewire.
We’re talking cheap equipment, not expensive.
“The USB-based alternatives are both (1) cheaper, (2) easier to find, (3) compatible with far more computer systems and offer pretty much the same performance (FW400 vs USB2.0).”
USB2 is about half as fast as Firewire 400 in real world tests. Not a big deal if you’re using the external HD only occasionally, but a big deal if you’re using it regularly. And given the read/write inefficiencies of Time Machine backups, a backup using USB will take four times as long as a backup with Firewire 400.
And as stated, USB is not particularly useful in the real world for booting the system, where Firewire is very reliable.
January 14th, 2009 at 9:17 am
laptop battery
laptop batteries
February 8th, 2009 at 9:18 pm
laptop battery
February 14th, 2009 at 1:12 am
yglesias.thinkprogress.org – cooooolest domain name)))
————————
my blog: http://hixoh.ru/
February 14th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
yo, yglesias.thinkprogress.org great name for site)))
————————
sponsored link: http://dewat.ru/
March 11th, 2009 at 4:54 am
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
March 12th, 2009 at 11:49 pm
I want to say – thank you for this!
March 15th, 2009 at 2:56 pm
How effective was this for people?
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:24 am
tramadol
It is the coolest site,keep so!
March 26th, 2009 at 5:03 pm
I dont usually comment, but after reading through so much info I had to say thanks
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:32 am
I want to say – thank you for this!
buy cheap viagra
April 9th, 2009 at 7:04 am
Thanks for the review! viagra
April 16th, 2009 at 10:07 pm
Hey. Our lives teach us who we are.
I am from China and also now am reading in English, tell me right I wrote the following sentence: “With a little forethought and some flexibility you can reach your favorite destinations without breaking the bank.”
Thanks
. John.