First Intel-based Macs released

Stormwatch · Post by **Stormwatch** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 9:02 am

+

it290 · Post by **it290** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 9:19 am

The macbook pro looks okay, although everyone (myself included) is bitching about the name. Does it support using two buttons on the trackpad by any chance? I checked the macbook site, but I couldn't stand reading it thanks to their awesome dark grey on black color scheme. If so, it could be a nice dual boot machine, although I'm wary about the quality of any Apple machines other than powermacs these days...

Vexorg · Post by **Vexorg** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 10:27 am

I do somewhat see the rationale behind the name change, although the PowerBook name was used on 680x0 based notebooks long before the PowerPC chip even existed. If not for the probably ridiculous cost involved, I'd buy one and run Windows on it just to bug some of the Mac zealots I know.

it290 · Post by **it290** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 5:49 pm

I don't mind the fact that it's a new name, just that it's a lame one. As for the cost, it's not bad.. I think they start at about 2 grand, which is more than decent for a high-end laptop.

judesalmon · Post by **judesalmon** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:02 pm

OMG - Apple release another overpriced computer with cheap components.

Isn't the new Intel chip just based on a PC laptop chip?

Ataru · Post by **Ataru** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:33 pm

judesalmon wrote:OMG - Apple release another overpriced computer with cheap components.

Isn't the new Intel chip just based on a PC laptop chip?

*yawn*

These computers are hella fast and extremely price competitive.

judesalmon · Post by **judesalmon** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:35 pm

Price competitive? I could make a vastly more powerful PC for the prices the want for those things.

PaCrappa · Post by **PaCrappa** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 8:01 pm

OMFG! Really?! Maybe you should do it then.

Pa

Vexorg · Post by **Vexorg** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 8:31 pm

Any time Apple is involved, you're going to be paying at least some premium for the name (and I expect that these will be no exception.) Given the fact that their target audience consists largely of professionals who need high-end gear to do their job and kool-aid drinking zealots who would buy two of anything that has an Apple logo on it, this has worked out well for them so far. I think they'll gain some market share in the hardware segment from this move, but I don't know that they're really going to grow the MacOS user base much by doing so/

Ataru · Post by **Ataru** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 9:08 pm

judesalmon wrote:Price competitive? I could make a vastly more powerful PC for the prices the want for those things.

build me an imac killer that takes up as much space or less, with at least as much power, for the same price or less. for rank S++ you should also catalog the software you install to make it compete "out of the box" with the iMac.

Specineff · Post by **Specineff** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 9:50 pm

This is only the beginning. Next, you'll be getting Windows 98 SE for your Mac. Mwa ha ha.

PaCrappa · Post by **PaCrappa** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 10:04 pm

Specineff wrote:This is only the beginning. Next, you'll be getting Windows 98 SE for your Mac. Mwa ha ha.

HAHA! Man, I don't think anything more perfect could have been said right then. This thread should be rich with comedic nerdly angst.

LET THE GAMES BEGIN!!!

Pa

Davey · Post by **Davey** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 1:43 am

Vexorg wrote:I think they'll gain some market share in the hardware segment from this move, but I don't know that they're really going to grow the MacOS user base much by doing so/

How so? By providing an expensive, proprietary alternative?

Regardless, I think the whole Intel/Mac thing is blown out of proportion. End users don't know the difference between x86 and PPC anyway. (Well, I'm sure snobbish Mac users will claim they can).

Ataru wrote:build me an imac killer that takes up as much space or less, with at least as much power, for the same price or less.

A Dell XPS 200 would be pretty close, probably.

Stormwatch · Post by **Stormwatch** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 6:46 am

Apple does not fight in prices. They cost a premium, yes, but they deliver quality. By that I mean not only a well-built computer, but also a well-designed machine, in looks and functionality, especially the best OS and user interface out there.

(but let me be the first to say... all of Apple's post-ADB keyboards and mouses suck.)

it290 · Post by **it290** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 8:21 am

Apple does not fight in prices. They cost a premium, yes, but they deliver quality. By that I mean not only a well-built computer, but also a well-designed machine, in looks and functionality, especially the best OS and user interface out there.

You know, I would say that used to be true, but ever since their 'reJobsification', it seems like they've concentrated more on image than on quality. Everyone says they have great quality, but I have witnessed plenty of Apple hardware failures, mostly on their laptops, but also cinema displays, ipods, and so forth. On the other hand, all of my pre-iMac apple hardware is still going strong. I think the PowerMacs are built really well, but their other hardware isn't really any better reliability-wise than most other top-tier PC manufacturers IMO.

As for the OS, I like OS X a fair bit and use it daily, and it's certainly a tremendous improvement over the utter crap that was the classic OS, but Mac-heads tend to praise it (and especially the UI) like it's the best thing in the universe. Let's face it, the first two releases of OS X were basically 'paid betas', and are pretty much worthless nowadays. The UI has undergone many serious changes since 10.0, and UI consistency has gone down the crapper. Why does Mail have to look different from every other app now? How about iTunes and Safari? Apple used to be really serious about consistency, and in fact this was one of the strongest points of the classic OS, but it seems they've lost interest in it.

There are a few other things that bug me about OS X... for one, the new 'big features' that they feel they must add in every release don't always pan out. For 10.4, it was Dashboard and Spotlight. Dashboard pretty much just sucks-yes, it can be handy for some things, but the fact that you can't interact with it and your desktop at the same time really knocks it down quite a bit in my eyes. Spotlight I'm sure will improve over time (especially as apps continue to add their own metadata), but the way it is right now, it's far less efficient than the old method of just searching for filenames, and takes up more system resources to boot.

The OS really needs some responsiveness tweaks, as well. Even on the Mac I have at work -- a G5 quad with 2G of RAM -- I get the pinwheel of death more often than I'd like, and the machine still swaps all the time. On top of that, stupid things like print dialogs, file choosers, and the ever-lovable 'The clipboard failed to export because it is too big to export' message prevent me from doing anything else, and this just feels like a big relic from the non-preemptive days. What the hell is up with that message, anyway? I have 2G of RAM and god knows how much swap, and I can't copy 50 megs worth of image data to my clipboard and paste it somewhere else? Apple needs to just throw away all the legacy stuff and overhaul the OS.

.... ok, that turned into a rant, but my point is merely that the Apple premium is not at all a guarantee of quality, either in the hardware or the OS. Unfortunately, I see this becoming more true as time goes on, especially as Apple continues to try and leverage the iPod in order to sell more Macs.

Specineff · Post by **Specineff** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 8:27 am

I wonder why they re-release the OS every six freaking months. Tiger, Panther, Cheetah.. jeez. And I thought MS was greedy.

it290 · Post by **it290** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 8:30 am

Next release will be Liger.

Stormwatch · Post by **Stormwatch** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 8:58 am

*chuckles* But seriously, it will be Leopard.

D · Post by D » Thu Jan 12, 2006 11:11 am

To me mac is quality, but works different and could possibly ofer less flexibilty than pc's. But pc's are shite all of 'em.

And there's the thing called virusses and worms and spyware.
If you are not afraid of them buy a pc.
If you want nothing to do with them buy a mac

lmn4096 · Post by **lmn4096** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 2:01 pm

I must admit that Mac is not that expensive for some product.

I purchased a MacMini for my wife and it's incredible that for less than 500$ you have a full computer with OS bundled with it.

I don't think that you can find a PC smaller than 6.5"x6.5" with a DVD/CD-RW, 512 Meg of Ram, Ati radeon 9200, with Windows XP OS for that price.

or prouve me wrong

Also one of the good things with this MacMini is the noise... it's so quiet

God I'm writing now from my bulky desktop PC and this monster is drilling my ear drum

Ataru · Post by **Ataru** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:39 pm

Specineff wrote:I wonder why they re-release the OS every six freaking months. Tiger, Panther, Cheetah.. jeez. And I thought MS was greedy.

More like once every 12 to 18 months.

and as someone who's used OS X from 10.0 through 10.3.9, I can say that while 10.0 and 10.1 weren't enough to get me off of OS 9, 10.2 and 10.3 were fantastic upgrades that brought with them significant increases in speed and efficiency.

Also, people bitching about Apple's prices simply have not been paying attention for the past 3 years. Entry level Mac Mini is $499. Entry level iBook is $999. The $999 late 2004 model iBook i'm using now is powerful enough that I use it to run Logic Pro 7.1.1, Reaktor 5, and InDesign CS, among other monstrous CPU eating apps.

The new dual core 17" iMac is $1299. With a dvd burner, a good graphics card, a built in camera, a remote control, tons of useful software, the OS, and a 17" monitor...

captain ahar · Post by **captain ahar** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:40 pm

you know its funny, i'm deathly afraid of macs. i like them... when i am using them at school, but i'd never buy one. pcs are what i am used to, even with all the shit that happens.

worthless post i know, i just thought i should include something other than a thanks to it290 for several funny posts.

extrarice · Post by **extrarice** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 5:07 pm

I used to be a die-hard mac nut.

Then I used BeOS (God rest it's zombie bones). Never before or since have I found OS perfection, both from a user's perspective and as a software developer.

Now I'm more of a platform agnostic - I don't care what other people use, and other people should share that idea.

For what it's worth, here's what I use now:
Macs for work
Windows for games
Linux for development

Shame that PPC on the desktop is now dead. They were efficient little buggers.

PaCrappa · Post by **PaCrappa** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 6:34 pm

extrarice wrote:Now I'm more of a platform agnostic - I don't care what other people use, and other people should share that idea.

I agree. I buy a new Mac about once every four years and I don't give a damn what anybody else does. My Macs have all worked just fine and the windows machines I've used (aside from exgirlfriend's POS) have all been just fine.

It is awesome when guys get all angsty and blameful about the price of a Mac when they'd never buy one anyway. We all need hobbies I guess.

Pa

Vexorg · Post by **Vexorg** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 7:05 pm

I'm just a bit surprised you can find people criticizing the Mac somewhere on the Internet without being denounced as a blasphemer...

df0notfound · Post by **df0notfound** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 8:23 pm

I'm a mac user, my Titanium powerbook 800 is heading up to the 4 year mark and its pretty much changed how I feel about computers, they're actually a joy to use again. The poor interface design from microsoft just never really mixed well with me.

Mixed feeling about the new "Macbook" I love the power cord ace idea, doesn't look as nice as the old one but a great piece of industrial design. Macbook is a really crappy name, expected better from apple but then again they did release the "mighty mouse" which was also a pretty stupid name. Should have called it "Powerbook Duo" or "Powerbook CORE!!!!!!!" well would make sense seen as mine says "Powerbook G4" under the screen and the black plastic one was "Powerbook G3"
Few weird choices with stuff like no FW800 and including that ugly IR port at the front, should have just made those remotes bluetooth from the start.

Not so keen on the move to Intel, mostly because one of my favourite things about the macs is whats behind the os. If something major ever fucked up on a mac like a laptop cd drive broke, you could still save stuff off it thanks to Firewire disk mode. Plug it to another mac turn it on and hold T and it suddenly becomes a very large and expensive firewire hard drive, but this is at such a low level it can do it without an os on so you can then install an os (put the cd in the working mac and select the laptops drive) or take important files off.
I don't know if the new Intels do stuff like this, if they do then great but if not then its a step back as far as I'm concerned. Speeds never been an issue for me I mean my laptop should feel ancient but OSX just seems to be getting faster each time I upgrade.

extrarice · Post by **extrarice** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 9:01 pm

Powerbook Duo was already used, iirc.

As for firewire disk mode, the change in CPU should make no difference. I believe this is a part of open firmware (read: Mac's BIOS). The change in processor will have very little collateral damage. After all, this isn't the first time Apple has changed processor families (680x0 to PPC migration in the early 90s), let alone they just completed a massive OS migration from OS9 to BSD Unix. They know how to make transitions as painless as possible.

Mind you, there may be small hiccups with the PPC-to-x86 translator (Rosetta), as there was with the 68k emulation on early PPC chips, but nothing really to worry about.

Vexorg · Post by **Vexorg** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 9:09 pm

From what I've read, Apple has had the ability to compile x86 binaries for their operating systems for years now (and in fact maintained the x86 code base for that purpose), so it's not like they just switched over to x86 overnight. Just because they announced the change at the last Macworld doesn't mean they haven't known it was coming.