“What an ungrateful bunch you are. This week Apple began its transition to Intel processors six months ahead of schedule, and all you can do is carp. Don’t you know you’re supposed to swoon over every shiny new piece of kit? It’s an odd moment. After years of lagging behind in the speed race, Apple will next month ship a PowerBook that overnight offers a dramatic doubling of performance for ordinary tasks, such as loading pages in Safari. The SPEC benchmarks Apple quotes are 4.5x faster for integer performance and 5.2x faster on floating point tests. Out goes the bottleneck bus, pegged at 167Mhz for so long, replaced by a 667Mhz bus – that’s 4x faster. And the Radeon X1600 brings Apple right up to date,” Andrew Orlowski writes for The Register.
So why, as the barman said to the horse, the long face? The catch of course is that only software that has been compiled into a ‘Universal Binary’, containing a native x86 executable, will benefit from the speed bump,” Orlowski writes. “And what Apple giveth, Apple taketh away.”
Orlowski details the list of questionable things that we all know so well by now: the lack of the FireWire 800 port, the slower, less capable DVD burner, the missing battery performance information, and asks, “So did Apple launch the MacBook too soon? Apple didn’t really have much choice. Shrewd pro buyers have been snapping up G4 and G5 based Macs as an hedge against a bumpy migration to x86. This has forestalled any anticipated ‘Osborne Effect’ to date. In March 2001, Apple unleashed the first Mac OS X, one that was far from ready for prime time. It couldn’t wait any longer – and a real product, no matter how deficient, convinces the market of one’s intentions. The early launch of the MacBook gives Apple’s ISVs a strong incentive to accelerate their plans to introduce x86 native software. They can’t blame Apple for lagging, now.”
Full article here.
Advertisements:
• MacBook Pro. The first Mac notebook built upon Intel Core Duo with iLife ’06, Front Row and built-in iSight. Starting at $1999. Free shipping.
• iMac. Twice as amazing — Intel Core Duo, iLife ’06, Front Row media experience, Apple Remote, built-in iSight. Starting at $1299. Free shipping.
• iMac and MacBook Pro owners: Apple USB Modem. Easily connect to the Internet using dial-up service. $49.00.
• iPod Radio Remote. Listen to FM radio on your iPod and control everything with a convenient wired remote. Just $49.
• iPod. 15,000 songs. 25,000 photos. 150 hours of video. The new iPod. 30GB and 60GB models start at just $299. Free shipping.
• Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Apple MacBook Pro, ExpressCard and EVDO – January 14, 2006
Report: key products missing from Steve Jobs’ Macworld keynote due to Intel Core Duo supply issues – January 12, 2006
O’Grady: Apple’s new MacBook Pro raises a lot of questions – January 11, 2006
My three beefs with the Powerbook are the obvious dvd burner, battery info, and the video isn’t exactly state-of-the-art. Otherwise it’s fine. And now I’m sure people will start flaming me because I said something negative about Apple.
To answer the question in the headline, time will tell. From what I remember, going from those Motorola 68K processors to PowerPC was a little bumpy, but not bad. You just have to give a little time for the software developers to catch up.
The only thing that is going to suck is that even though Rosetta will be able to run PPC code on the new Intel machines, I will be “forced” to upgrade my software to be fully compatible with the new processors. However, I think the increased productivity gained by having a faster machine will be able to justify the cost.
MDN has the right take on this, it is still a battle, but one that will have great rewards. New hardware and software soon!
@Ray – Flame
Okay, how’s that?
A Fatwa is in effect against Ray, God willing. Death to the infidels!
Ray, I’m not going to flame you… but, The powerbooks are still available for sale.
The MacBook Pro didn’t just completely replace their entire PowerBook line, at the Apple Store, both are still available. So this isn’t as much a technical issue as one of marketing and positioning.
I can’t quite figure out what they’re thinking atm. It seems as though they don’t want the MacBook Pro to cannibalize PowerBook sales… for now. My guess is that 6 months from now, there will be no more powerbooks, there will be a 17″ MacBook Pro. The FW800 and DualLayer DVD burners will both be in the 2 MacBook Pro models.
What’s the big deal? It’s a transition.
Windows XPee was absolutely launched prematurely and never fixed. Why not point that out too dip sh*t!
Yes, the switch to PPC was a little bumpy, but i expect this transition to be smother (although not without some bumps, like the FW800 and DVD issues).
With the PPC transition, what hurt the most was the 68K emulator’s lack of efficiency, particularly when switching between PPC and 68K code, and vice versa (Rosetta doesn’t appear to suffer the same performance issues), and the fact most of the OS was still in 68K code, which is not the case this time around. These two differences will be huge. It wasn’t until the G3’s that the PPC’s actually felt faster than the 68K’s to me. I’m not convinced the Intel chips will outperform the G5’s like Steve’s RDF implies, but i don’t expect the Intel processors to be hobbled to the same degree as the PPC’s were at first.
I do think the MacBook Pro may be a rushed product, but suspect the new iMac is probably ready for prime time (as well as any first Intel Mac will be). People will always complain about a lack of native software, but in truth, quite a bit is already native. If there’s a key app you use which isn’t ready, then you might feel the transition is occurring too soon, but you know what? No one is forcing you to buy a new Intel Mac right away. And there are some software developers who will drag their feet no matter what, so the sooner the first Intel Mac’s hit the street, the more incentive developers have to quit stalling and get their app’s going.
Even though the MacBook Pro may seem a bit rushed, that is precisely the product which most needs the Intel chips. High end G5’s have more than enough horse power to satisfy most; it’s the lackluster G4 portables where the biggest bottlenecks and pent-up demand is to be found.
Just my 2¢ worth. YMMV.
From the article: “It’s an odd moment. After years of lagging behind in the speed race, Apple will next month ship a PowerBook that overnight offers a dramatic doubling of performance for ordinary tasks, such as loading pages in Safari. The SPEC benchmarks Apple quotes are 4.5x faster for integer performance and 5.2x faster on floating point tests. Out goes the bottleneck bus, pegged at 167Mhz for so long, replaced by a 667Mhz bus – that’s 4x faster. And the Radeon X1600 brings Apple right up to date.
So why, as the barman said to the horse, the long face?
The catch of course is that only software that has been compiled into a ‘Universal Binary’, containing a native x86 executable, will benefit from the speed bump.”
And it’s a big catch. Since the software running through Rosetta will take an even bigger hit then not-quite-optimized x86 code, Yonah’s performance needed to be be off the charts. But most of the reviews I’ve read have said these units are just good, solid dual core machines in that regard. And we didn’t need Intel for that. Even if these Jobs-optimized performance quotes are right for the Mac Book Pro, you could have had all that plus better battery life, plus FW800, plus a better DVD burner, if Apple had simply used the dual core G4. No transition necessary.
Blame Apple for “lagging”? No. They’re not just keeping up with the Jones’s, they ARE the Jone’s now. But blame them for lying – about how great Yonah would be, and how it would revolutionize their line-up? You bet. As much as the Macintel’s are better in some ways to the ‘prior PPC art’, it’s only because Apple decided not to use the best of what was/is available for that art. It makes the whole transition look specious, based on how it was sold particularly, and now everyone is finally realizing they’ll have to pay (literally) a software performance penalty to boot.
Call it ungrateful if you wish. I call it non-RDF influenced realism.
I learned my lesson with transition to both PowerPC and MacOSX….wait, be patient, wait some more….keep waiting, wait. Okay now is the time to buy…whoops, something new coming out…wait, wait….
Personally I think an early release works to Apples benefit in the end. They offer us a product that has room for improvement. Right now they can take a list of complaints (strait from here on MDN and other forums) get the feedback from the true mac zealots, and then give us what we want later on. Also as was already pointed out, the developers are now the front lines. Its up to them what the future is going to hold as well. Lets just sit back, bitch about what we want, and see what happens eh.
Greg Nacu writes: “I can’t quite figure out what they’re thinking atm. It seems as though they don’t want the MacBook Pro to cannibalize PowerBook sales… for now. My guess is that 6 months from now, there will be no more powerbooks, there will be a 17″ MacBook Pro. The FW800 and DualLayer DVD burners will both be in the 2 MacBook Pro models. ”
Apparently the low power variant of the Core Duo chip used in the MacBook Pro is scarce, so with limited supply it appears Apple chose only one PowerBook model to transition. There may have been other factors too, but this appears to be the prime factor at play. Choosing the middle model to transition would seem to make sense from a marketing perspective. I think when the CPU supply increases, we’ll see the rest of the PowerBook line transition to MacBook Pro.
MW: Probably, as in that’s probably what will happen.
Odyssey67 – I have similar feelings regarding this.
Steve has ordered up megadoses of kool-aid for us all to swallow….
Steve´s going Intel for one thing – to sell more videos and music…but he forgot to demo the big bang minimac, et al delivery system at MacWorld. Why? Who knows…but it smells like not good news and gives Microsoft, Google and others time to catch up.
All that counts now is does a system deliver and protect video and music adequately for the average consumer. What % of the market really needs a faster, more powerful computer??? is the thinking.
MacTypeDude – so how many MacBooks have you ordered???
My biggest (though ultimately trivial, I guess) gripe about the new PowerBook is that they didn’t redesign the case. Yes, the existing alu look is a nice design – but surely it would have been to Apple’s benefit to have a complete rebranding of the model, to go with the new name and chip… Out with the old, in with new sort of thing. As it is, it feels like a sort of half-way house solution to me…
It seems like the macbook is targeted more for people who currently aren’t currently mac-users (like myself). I run linux on the desktop, and XP only when I absolutely have to (games). But especially for the laptop, I would like a mainstream OS. The Macbook fits in very nicely.
Sure, it doesn’t have firewire, a slower DVD drive, less pixels, perhaps crappier battery life, and require repurchase for current Mac users. However, none of these really affect me. It’s *still* better than what I would get if I bought a windoze laptop.
Why the Macbook instead of the Powerbook for me? Well, however much I dislike Windows, it’s nice to know it’s an option if I need it. Also, Linux has been ported to the PowerPC for sometime, I am much more familiar with the 8086 distros.
I am a bit worried about the battery life, but that is usually the price of a faster processor.
Odyssey67 sez Apple is lying because the comparison between Yonah and “prior art” is unfair, because Apple did not use the best of prior art: dual core G4 chips. Sorry, that’s just silly. It’s not a lie to say that what you are introducing is better than what you had. Inasmuch as the comparison is not a “hidden” comparison–in fact, it is completely out in the open–it is the opposite of a lie. You may not like Steve’s spin, but so what. I am typing this message on a G4 1.67 15-inch PB. In a few weeks, my MacBook Pro will arrive and it will run EVERYTHING I care about natively: the system, Safari, Mail, iLife, and iWork. And based on what I saw at MacWorld, those things fly. That’s why I plunked down my credit card, even though my PCMCIA cards won’t work with the new Book. Again, this is the opposite of specious, because for me, and probably a few others, this will be a real live, dramatic improvement. For some software, there will be a transition period. So what? Seriously, so what? That’s not new in any change of this magnitude, and given the performance of Rosetta, it looks like it won’t even be that bad. Do I wish the PB could have gotten much faster last year? Sure, but it didn’t. You are actually the one distorting reality, because you are arguing that the current PB crop should be better already. Okay, so what? It is what it is. Claiming that Yonah should be compared to chips that could have been put in a PB but never were is the RDF. Worse, your argument suggests that the rest of us should have been happy to keep our future tied to Motorola or IBM. No thanks. Jobs already made that mistake once, and he clearly was not going to get stuck with it again.
When such decisions get made, there will always be transitional issues such as Photoshop not being ready for Universal Binary yet. So, people who rely on PS might not want to bite just yet, and they’ll probably have more choices later. That’s not a bad thing. And also, there will always be some new chip for IBM or Moto just around the corner that Apple could have waited for. Just a few weeks ago, that was the rumor, remember, that Apple was going to keep using PPC chips for some models for yesars to come. So, sure, we could have hoped that Apple would release a dual core G4 laptop, but that would have simply delayed further the transition of the PB line to the Intel chips that seem at the laptop level to offer a brighter future.
P.S. Your arguments about the DVD burner, FW800, and better battery life are completely specious. The first two are merely peripheral factors, not related to the chip, but to design decisions Apple made. As for battery life, we don’t actually know that a dual core G4 would have had better battery life, do we, since we don’t yet have the specs on the new one. For that matter, we don’t know that the current G4 chip battery life would have been any better either. Out of those 3 items, only FW800 is the true differential. If you need it, your choice is obvious: buy a current PB. They’re still selling them. Or share your view with Apple. But please, the accusation of “lying.” Sorry, it doesn’t sell.
Yoyodyne, it has Firewire 400, just not 800. Jobs “cliams” battery life is in the same range as current PBs, but I have to disagre that faster chips mean worse battery life. All things being equal, maybe, [i.e., clocking up the same chip]. But all things aren’t equal here. Not just different chips, updated peripherals, different motherboard, and hey, probably even a different battery. Just like when I stepped up from my TiBook to my first AlBook, battery life overall seemed betetr with a faster machine. As for repurchase, so far, everyone of my software developers that has released a UB, has done it for free. And since iLife is already on the MacBook Pro, I don’t have to “repurchase” that. I did upgrade to iWork 06 Family Edition, because I wanted Keynote 3 on all my Macs.
It is a different battery technology. They haven’t released the battery life because they aren’t quite sure what it is yet, not because they’re hiding something.
Queezie says: “Steve´s going Intel for one thing – to sell more videos and music … but he forgot to demo the big bang minimac, et al delivery system at MacWorld. Why? Who knows…but it smells like not good news and gives Microsoft, Google and others time to catch up.”
I’m mystified about this too – Intel offers Apple absolutely nothing if they don’t take advantage of all that Viiv stuff. I said the day of the keynote that I thought the April 1st reference was a clue of a more significant announcement to come. I think it definitely should be, but as you say it’s still not a good game plan. This whole video-distro segment of the industry is moving awfully fast – much quicker than audio did, when Apple caught everyone napping. They can’t count on that this time.
“All that counts now is does a system deliver and protect video and music adequately for the average consumer. What % of the market really needs a faster, more powerful computer??? is the thinking.”
Right – the TPM/DRM aspect of this is huge. I mean, certainly Mac book will be fast compared to the last PB, but not compared to what could have been under the CPUs Freescale’s had for almost a year now (both dual and single e600 cores). But with all these feature ‘deletions’, in a way it’s not just ‘who needs a better cpu’; it’s also who needs the features they’ve built their businesses around, or decent battery life, or what have you. It seems its all expendable, at the alter of Protected Video.
Actually, the fatalist in me wonders if we won’t see any multi-media stuff at all this year. Instead Apple (and all the PCers too) may wait until these TPM’d machines get more market penetration, before releasing the Viiv based stuff full bore. It would certainly make it easier to claim to the non-DRM’d Old Schoolers that they can’t have the video ‘goods’ until they ‘side-grade’!
Gotta hate fatalism.
fw800: maybe this can be blamed on the intel chipset? The expresscard slot (34 mm wide) is plenty fast for some vendor to come along and do dual FW800 ports. I saw a vendor holding an expresscard with dual SATA ports at the Apple booth yesterday (Firmtek.com)
DVD drive: they moved from 12mm to 9mm. This is a wierd design decision.. they wanted to make the laptop thinner, but couldn’t find a 9mm dual layer dvd burner?
My gut feeling is that Apple rushed this one out, in order to give themselves a little breathing room. The next iteration of MacBook Pro (aside from the obvious 12″ and 17″ models that’ll be like this 15″) should reveal their true intentions. This week was about evolution & speed.
And it’s a big catch. Since the software running through Rosetta will take an even bigger hit then not-quite-optimized x86 code, Yonah’s performance needed to be be off the charts. But most of the reviews I’ve read have said these units are just good, solid dual core machines in that regard. And we didn’t need Intel for that. Even if these Jobs-optimized performance quotes are right for the Mac Book Pro, you could have had all that plus better battery life, plus FW800, plus a better DVD burner, if Apple had simply used the dual core G4. No transition necessary.
You forget the fact that Freescale (as admitted in interview) was not interested in improving the G4 line further. So what, a dual G4 would be OK for a while, then the need for a new model would arise and apple would once again be screwed. IBM was also not focused on the G5 line-up. That was a dead end too, even though one or two newer models could still be produced. So, no, the transition WAS necessary.
But blame them for lying – about how great Yonah would be, and how it would revolutionize their line-up? You bet. As much as the Macintel’s are better in some ways to the ‘prior PPC art’, it’s only because Apple decided not to use the best of what was/is available for that art.
Where you under a rock? The “best of what available” was AT BEST a dead end, with only 1-2 half arsed models up the road. Motorola was screwed. IBM didn’t care. We don’t have to believe apple on this (no reason why we shouldn’t): a top Freescale/IBM guy admitted it.
Call it ungrateful if you wish. I call it non-RDF influenced realism.
No it is plain old idiocy.
Oddysy67 says: “Intel offers Apple absolutely nothing if they don’t take advantage of all that Viiv stuff.” Are you kidding? Um… dual core, higher clock speeds, lower energy consumption. Plus a better road map. I can’t believe some of the sh*t people make up on this board.
Poppycock:
My bad on the firewire. My main point, though, was even with the all the bad things that people have pointed out about the new Macbook, it still seems like a really good thing (*especially* having never owned a Mac before) to me. I’m counting down the days until mine arrives (ordered it the second day — one day grace period is always good).
You are correct that faster processor doesn’t necessitate lower battery life, as there are many factors involved — especially considering that it’s *entirely* different HW. However, without looking up the figures, I’m going to guess the Dual Core has way more transistors. The more transistors usually means more energy spent (you need to keep them in the on/off states). Of course, better batteries, etc. can help keep the battery life up there.
Anyways, I would love if it could actually run for 5 hours. I’ll still be happy with 3 hours. My last laptop (now nearly 7(!?) years old [a Dell 450Mhz Celeron) had at best 2 hours.
Some clarifications:
The X1600 graphics is state of the art. Sure, the X1800 is coming out soon, but both are modern graphics cards.
VIIV is just branding of an all Intel chip solution. Don’t tell me Intel has already found the next “megahertz myth” and people are believing it already.
Personally, I think the new Macbooks are a great first step. Your laptop just 4-5 faster. It’s all good…
>> You are correct that faster processor… I’m going to guess the Dual Core has way more transistors. The more transistors usually means more energy spent (you need to keep them in the on/off states). Of course, better batteries, etc. can help keep the battery life up there.
Go to the keynote stream, and fast forward to about 1:22. Steve does a good job at explaining the performance per watt aspect.
Poppycock says: “It’s not a lie to say that what you are introducing is better than what you had… the comparison … is completely out in the open … the opposite of a lie.”
I was careful to note that the MB is an improvement over the last PB. But it is also a fact that Apple sold the Macintel transition on the claim that continuing PPC advancement couldn’t do the same thing, especially on laptops. And that IS a lie:
http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/overview.jsp?nodeId=0162468rH3bTdG7249
Single & dual core G4 (MPC8641/D); 1.8-2+Ghz clockspeed range (same as yonah), running 533-667Mhz FSB (same as yonah), 1MB cache per core (same as yonah), integrated memory controllers (yonah doesn’t have it), “Asymmetric Multiprocessing” so two different operating systems can run at the same time (yonah doesn’t have it), integrated Gigabit ethernet controller (yonah doesn’t have it) …
The power ratings for the DC aren’t there, but a less advanced single core G4 (the MPC7448) w/200Mhz FSB, that Apple DIDN’T use last upgrade, gives the following:
less than 10W @ 1.0GHz
less than 15W @ 1.5GHz
Those power numbers – from a 90nm CPU no less! – are better than 65nm Yonah (30W @ 1.8), and is almost certainly why Apple didn’t use these CPUs when they last had the chance. If it’s really a “brighter future” with Intel (as you say), it seems incongruous that the past would need to be artifically darkened ahead of time.
BTW – the dates on the white papers (and the sites themselves) for the CPUs, range from 2004-05. Which means Apple, as a product developer, knew about them by 04; long before they were propagating fiction about the dead end they faced with PPC. So even if you want to ignore the implication that Jobs knew G4 wasn’t on deaths door, especially in comparison to what he went to, its impossible to ignore that simply using the better single core chip wouldn’t have “… delayed further the transition of the PB line to the Intel chips…”
“You may not like Steve’s spin, but so what… For some software, there will be a transition period. So what? Seriously, so what? That’s not new in any change of this magnitude … Do I wish the PB could have gotten much faster last year? Sure, but it didn’t. You are actually the one distorting reality, because you are arguing that the current PB crop should be better already. Okay, so what? It is what it is. Claiming that Yonah should be compared to chips that could have been put in a PB but never were is the RDF. Worse, your argument suggests that [we] should have been happy to keep our future tied to Motorola or IBM. No thanks. Jobs already made that mistake once, and … was not going to get stuck … again.”
What mistake?? Apple’s greatest success has come under PPC. G5 is the toast of the supercomuting world. G4 is obviously keeping apace, but PA Semiconductor has an even better mobile CPU coming this year (G6?). IBM has a G5 follow-on with the altivec equipped Power6 due in 07 (G7?). And Cell, due to it’s modular design, can be just about any damn thing they want it to be.
You answer a lot with “so what?” I just don’t think that way. And no, I don’t like Jobs’ spin – any spin for that matter. Spin’s just a fancy word for “lie”. If something can’t stand on it’s own merits and has to be ‘spun’, something’s not right about it. The more spin, the worse it is. Yonah having it all over G4, PPC being a dead end, its all total spin. A lie. Just call it what it is.
Steering back to the center lane; the point of the article was to ask why there isn’t more cheering about these products (apparently it’s not “so what” to everybody). What I’m saying is that, for all the difficulties inherent in any transition, a quantifiable improvment from changing vs staying the course is expected. 68k to PPC had that. OS9 to OSX too. PPC to x86 (at least Intel’s variety) doesn’t. And since there was no big multimedia announcement, which Intel COULD offer value to, the combination likely explains the quick RDF fade at MacWorld.
“P.S. Your arguments about the DVD burner, FW800, and better battery life are … specious. The first two are … not related to the chip, but to design decisions Apple made.”
Specious? The people who have sunk real money into these components, long touted by Apple as professional standards in their own right, lit up message boards in disagreement. As for not being related to the CPU – duh. But they ARE related to the CPU manufacturer, who also designed the motherboard. Intel doesn’t support FW – they support USB2 and this new card slot. If you don’t think that factored in to the FW800 & PCcard plugs disappearing, have I got a bridge in Brooklyn for YOU!
“.. share your view with Apple. But please, the accusation of “lying.” Sorry, it doesn’t sell.”
I have. And there’s no need to apologize. I understand. Just because the RDF is fading in most places doesn’t mean it is everywhere.
The new Mactels are 32bit 🙁
and really only temporary, Intel is coming out with 64 bit dual cores in September and Vista will only run on 64 bit supposely.
So 32 bit is just temporary to ease the demand for Powerbooks.
I think that they just put the horse before the cart because if they didn’t, the cart makers would be too slow. This puts pressure on software makers to at least update their stuff asap. And yet, Apple can say that it still offers a pony to those who lag behind.
I think that the new macintels will be bought by people who have multiple Macs (like me) so that we have the back up to fall back on. The interesting thing for me is that I will add a Macitel to my G4, G3 computers. I will have never tasted the G5.
Odyssey67
Right on. I’m still not convinced on the Intel jump. It gets round a short term problem, but whether it’s the right decision for the long run is another matter.
As for the benchmarks, I’ve been repeatedly posting (and probably boring anyone who’s noticed) about the G5 PowerMacs still outperforming the Intel based machines. The dual-core G5s are still faster than the dual-core Intels, and are ALSO 64-bit.
A little more info here
The 1st law of computers predicts the rapid growth in power but the more important 2nd law states that you should never buy Version 1 of anything unless you absolutely have to.
There is also a 3rd law I believe, and that is you should never try to ‘future proof’ your purchase. If, when you purchase, you need a Gig of RAM – buy it. By the time you need 2Gigs of RAM the price will be a lot less. Laptop specs are a little trickier to work out the necessary spec.
Personally, I’m happy with the G5 iMac and a 12″ G4 PB for now.
Oh yes, I forgot to say, it was interesting watching SJ using the new iMacs for the demos at the conference. When he wanted to illustrate some topic using Photoshop (I can’t remember what it was now) did everyone notice just how long it took Rossetta to flash it up on screen. It was a long time.
I know Photoshop isn’t the quickest into action on any machine but the intel machines were certainly struggling more than my G5 iMac. And you can bet they knew it was going to during rehersals – that’s why he made a comment/joke out of it – so they would certainly have made sure there was nothing running in parallel when he switched to the applicaion – in order to get it up as fast as possible during the demo.
Ready. Fire. Aim.
Guys, keep your pants on. Please. It’s fun to see a sprited debate, but so much of this is idle speculation. We won’t see the shipping product for at least 3-4 weeks, and you’re acting like you’ve owned one for a while. Instead of making rash assumptions, be patient. For example, on Leo Laporte’s national radio show today (Saturday), Laporte mentioned that he chatted with the Mac Book product manager at this week’s MacWorld show. The product manager noted that battery life is improving in part because of close work between Apple and Intel on the power management software in the new Mac Book that controls the degree of power draw by the twin processors (and functions within the processors). He explained that refinements being made in the next couple of weeks can make a significant improvement in battery life. Perhaps it is for this reason that Apple has been holding off on publishing battery life specs. But of course, that would mean that you railbirds would have to stop and listen before ranting.
Then there’s the issue of software compatability with the new Intel processors. Leo Laporte stated that AT THIS MOMENT, the new iLife and iWork may be the only software that is fully compatable with the new Intel processors. AT THIS MOMENT. Since none of you are in possession of the new Mac Books, and won’t be for at least several weeks, our concerns about everyone else’s software amounts to idle speculation. Yes, it is true that some programs such as Final Cut Pro won’t work at the moment with the new processors, as Laporte stated today on the radio. But this will change, and I think it will change rapidly. A number of programs will run via Rosetta. It may not be perfect, and will be slower at first. But I am confident that most of the apps we depend on will run, and given how much faster the new Intel processors are, even with Rosetta, I would not be surprised that the new Mac Books are faster with old software than the current Powerbooks.
So am I freaked out? Not at all? I placed an order for my Mac Book almost immediately. I don’t care if it does not have FW 800 (someone will make an adapter for those who need one – and besides, FW 800 has had its share of problems), or dual layer DVD. I needed a new laptop ASAP, and I am confident that my new Mac Book, when it arrives, will make me very happy.
Besides, it’s got a great Scottish name. And to quote Mike Meyers from a great SNL skit, “If it’s not Scottish, it’s CRAP!!!”
There. I feel better now.
Initially, I was sad, but now I understand why FW800 is no longer important for Apple:
Here are some facts:
ExpressCard will have the theoretical maximum throughput to transfer data at a whopping 250 MBps (actually, 500 MBps total; 250 MBps to the computer in one direction and 250 MBps to the card in the other). This is in comparison to the now seemingly sluggish 132-MBps PC Card standard.
EC’s throughput is ideal for video transfers and uncompressed files. To compare it with throughputs you’re familiar with: Gigabit Ethernet has a throughput of 125 MBps, FireWire 800 runs at 100 MBps, and USB 2.0 can reach 60 MBps.
That is, EC is 2.5 times faster than FW800.
So if Apple or any other vender produces a FireWire 800 to ExpressCard adaptor, there should be no loss of speed at all, even with two ports on the same card.
As for the DVD burner, I really suspect that pretty soon, probably by February, an option for fast dual layer will be made possible. To me, this is the only evidence of Apple being rushed to ship the MacBook Pro.
Here is an EC adapter for FW800
http://www.xterasys.com/e94b.htm
Orlowski is an idiot. He’s the guy that tried to make an iTunes commercial during the Superbowl to an ad to steal music.
Orlowski couldn’t find his ass with both hands and a map.
Bozo.
~s
There’s no pleasing some people, just as the article implied. Just read the above posts.
Hello, people! Think about what just happened! Apple brought to market a new architecture in 6 months or so. Be happy. To accomplish that feat, compromises had to be made. One it’s a design that still looks modern, and two, it reassures those people that are concerned about the transition that it’s NOT about the chip that makes a Mac, a MAC! And, three, no time had to be wasted designing a significantly new formfactor. You want something completely new? Okay, wait 18 months instead of 6. And, during that time, the Osborne effect will have time to raise its ugly head.
The bottom part of the case is thinner, so they couldn’t use the 8xDL drive. It’s not a downspec, it’s just not available. There wasn’t enough time to incorporate FW800. Wait for rev2 if you want that. Battery life, well, all the evidence indicates it should be about the same as before.
From measurements of other CoreDuo laptops by PCMag, the Acer 8200 and HP DV1000, the battery benchmark comes in at 3:47 and 3:37. Expect the MacBook to do the same. These are benchmarks and not real-world times, so for comparison to a couple fast Centrino times, they show HP DV4000 and Dell XPS170 get 2:28 and 2:34 scores. Clearly, the CoreDuos outperform fast Centrinos on the battery test, quite significantly.
To Quote Dave H.
“Odyssey67
Right on. I’m still not convinced on the Intel jump. It gets round a short term problem, but whether it’s the right decision for the long run is another matter.
As for the benchmarks, I’ve been repeatedly posting (and probably boring anyone who’s noticed) about the G5 PowerMacs still outperforming the Intel based machines. The dual-core G5s are still faster than the dual-core Intels, and are ALSO 64-bit.”
I am also in TOTAL agreement with that, BUT, Apple has decided to make the switch and none of our opinions matter now. They’ve gone Intel – we will probably find out more of exactly WHY with the passage of time. There has to be more to it………
As for me, I’ve got a G5 and I’ll wait it out and see what surprises are in store for 2006. Everything runs on it, and it’s got PLENTY of life left to go.
ONE NOTE: If I were advising a “switcher” or someone new to Macs in general, I’d tell them to try and snap up a G5 iMac over the Intel iMac before they are gone – by the time they need to upgrade, the smoke will have cleared AND they won’t have any software issues in the immediate future. Just my 2¢……
Odyssey67:
Look I know you feel at the current state of affairs that PPC is currently better than the Intel chips.
And you feel Apple should have used the latest G4 chips, but IBM and Freescale do not want to go forward in a big way with this roadmap. There just aren’t enough users to make it super profitable.
I know you are going to say IBM is behind the PPC, look at the cell they are making for MS.
But IBM feels they’ll sell more cell chips than true PPC. They aren’t behind the PPC for Apple.
This is all academic, yes it can be done and yes the specs are out there, but if the chipmakers don’t want to go forward with it, it’s dead in the water. And no amount of you saying it should / could be use is moot.
There are plenty of great ideas out there that are superior but if it doesn’t make a ton of revenue it won’t go forward – look at Betamax.
Just accept the world isn’t perfect and go forward.
Just my two cents.
Ahhhh – that is where Odyssey67 was all this time when the news of 2x G5 performance hit the streets.
Researching his next round of conspiracy theories.
First it was ALL DRM and the fact PowerPC ran rings around Intel.
Now there is no DRM released and Yonah SPANKS both the G4 and G5 in terms of performance, the BIG ISSUES are lack of native software…
AWESOME what some people will do to REMAINS NEGATIVE ABOUT EVERYTHING!!!!
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”tongue wink” style=”border:0;” />
my 2 cents
Luke
PS – I do agree with Odyssey67 about snapping up a G5 PowerMac AT A SIGNIFICANT discount when the new Intel based ProMac’s are released (I’m guessing that is what they will be called when they drop the Power from PowerMac – it can’t be a MacMac?
.%20%20As%20mentioned%20Universal%20Binaries%20will%20ensure%20compatibilty%20and%20it%20would%20be%20nice%20to%20have%20a%20PIECE%20OF%20(ANCIENT)%20HISTORY%20in%20my%20collection%20%20img%20src=http://www.macdailynews.com/images/smileys/cheese.gif)
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”cheese” style=”border:0;” />
“Just accept the world isn’t perfect and go forward.”
Ahh words of WISDOM from Matrix3.
Bitching and MOANING are only worth while if they can actually achieve something.
eg Global Warming – bitch and moan and something may be done.
eg Apple and PowerPC – bitch and moan and NOTHING will be done.
Steve Jobs is NOT going to return to PowerPC EXCLUSIVELY. He may choose in the future (if Universal Binaries turn out to work like they’re supposed to to use Intel, AMD and Freescale/IBM architechture as it SUITS HIM, but your whining ain’t going to influence him. Why – cause he KNOWS he has you.
Cause as much as you whine about the requirement for EXCELLENCE in product design/engineering, he knows that ONLY his company comes CLOSE to meeting your demands.
So yes a few of you extremists will take you “business” elsewhere and build yoru own Linux x86 based boxes to “show Steve Jobs you HATE his decision to go x86 and that you’d RATHER a PowerPC” (so laughable it isn’t actually funny)
But most of you bitches will be Apple customers till the proverbal cows are not only home, but tucked in!!!
SO stop whining, focus on the positive and focus on trying to change what you can – the implementaion of DRM.
It will happen, but HOW it happens WILL and CAN be influenced by customers feedback. In the end your choice of Media Devices DOES interest Mr Jobs and Apple. They will likely listen to your suggestions (as long as they are reasonable and not simply, “don’t do it and switch back to PowerPC”)
You see my view on this move isn’t all rosy, but I also REALISE it’s a computer, yep a PIECE of hardware, as much as my can opener and my lawnmower. They all HELP me do jobs quickly and easily, however they are hardly things to consume so much energy, let alone NEGATIVE energy over.
My LIFE will go on whether Apple used PowerPC, Intel, Freescale, AMD or a couple of toothpicks and a rubber band. And the things that are TRULY important in this world deserve more of my concern than this issue.
Get OVER IT.
And Odyssey67, may I ask have you HONESTLY written as much of your theories and “ANALysis” to Apple and Steve jobs as you’ve posted here.
Because if it ALL SUCKS as much as you say it does, why are you wasting your time here (where nothing is going to change) and WHY are you NOT putting your effort into ACTUALLY DOING SOMETHING about it? Maybe you don’t believe your stance as much as you say you do, otherwise you’d stop wasting your time (and ours) with the same message that will still be doing NOTHING about the situation when you post tomorrow, just like it did NOTHING about the issue since you started posting over 3 months ago.
I’m still remaining positive (despite reservations about it all) and you have spent so much time and energy – FOR WHAT?
Luke
PS – why is everyone now using “my 2 cents” to sign off?
For a laptop battery life is king, all of the intels don’t do so well in that reguard in comparsion to the G4 laptops, speed doesn’t do you any good
if you have no power, this first rev seems to have taken 2 steps forward
and one step back.
Well, as my new saying goes:
Rev. A? Stay AWAY!
Whatever processor is in the box is moot at this point. Yeah, I’d have preferred Apple to stick with PPC, but since IBM and Freescale have essentially written it off, then that’s IT! Time to move on…
Right now, it’s ALL about the software!
In a year or two when the hardware glitches have been squashed (Rev. B or C)…
AND the majority of Mac software has been released as Universal Binaries…
AND those that will NOT make the transition have made that point clear, meaning that Rosetta won’t be necessary for much of anything important…
THEN it’ll be time to seriously make the move.
8bit
I bought an iMac G5 just before Christmas, and the more I think about it, the happier I am that I got one of the last PPC machines. At some point in the future, Apple are going to stop updating OSX for PPC, but considering Tiger still supports seven year old PowerMacs, I’ll be very surprised if I don’t get a full five years use out of the machine before I even have to think abouut Linuxing it.
LukeinOz, I don’t know why you’re ranting. We’re entitled to bitch about Apple’s decision. Apple of course will completely ignore us, but sod it, MDN is here so that we can get these things off our chest rather than boring our uninterested friends and relatives. When did dissent instantly make someone a troll?
Odyssey’s conspiracy theories never ends, even though when slapped in the face with facts and his flawed logic exposed….he will argue with his own interpretation of a technical article that is so far above his head, even though his interpretation is quite wrong and shown to be wrong. (Odyssey, remember you linking and quoting an Arstechnica article that actually supported the points I was making, yet you were unable to grasp the concept?) I still find it amusing he tried to convince everybody a single dual core CPU with hyperthreading was directly comparable to quad core G5, and for some reason he didn’t grasp clock for clock a 20/31 stage P4 was doing less work than a P3/AMD chip.
http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/7966/
I already addressed this point in a thread long, long ago Odyssey….but even a dual core G4 would not have been a great step forward compared to Yonah, as despite the minor differences in fsb and mhz it is still a slow chip (hey, it’s as if you’re advocating Dell insist on dual core Pentium 2’s). And you need to learn the difference between idle and load for direct power consumption differences. And for heaven’s sake, quit your absolute reliance on product press releases not in the hands of independant reviewers.
I’m getting a Dell.
Dave H wrote:
“MDN is here so that we can get these things off our chest rather than boring our uninterested friends and relatives.”
Hey mate never said you can’t get something off your chest – but for f$&k sake how long does it take?
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”tongue wink” style=”border:0;” />
Also your (a) friends and (b) relatives have a reason to be bored by you:
(a) choice in being your friend AND
(b) genes!
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”cheese” style=”border:0;” />
OK that was a simple piss take.
“When did dissent instantly make someone a troll?”
Never said that, in fact if you read my 2nd post I was saying dissent is VERY GOOD.
As long as it is DIRECTED towards achieving something, otherwise it is just another OPINION
So go ahead GET IT OFF YOUR CHEST.
But as I have repeatedly asked (and many others) when will that exactly be over, so we can move on to sharing thoughts about stuff that isn’t HISTORY?
my 2 cents
Luke
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
My three and a half year old TiBook is still working fine, thank you. I’m hoping that by the time my machine is truly obsolete that all of the Intel bugs will be worked out and we will have a nice MacBook Pro that is 3+ GHz fast. (fingers crossed)
Nobody is even talking about the missing modem. I have wireless at my home, but I have still used my built-in modem on many occasions. It’s always nice to have it as an option. As far as the new Express card replacing the PC card, I have always had a hard time finding any uses for this. Maybe we will get more product with this express card, but somehow, I doubt it. Anybody have an express card modem that will work on a MacBook Pro?
I’m always glad to hear about new product from Apple (especially for the laptops) and I’m especially happy to see that they beat their earlier prediction and brought out an Intel Mac faster than we all thought. I’m looking forward to seeing the new Intel Macs come out.