Apple: First The Skinny. Now The Fat

rated by 0 users
This post has 6 Replies | 0 Followers

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 26,418
Points 1,193,035
Joined: Sep 2007
ForumsAdministrator
News Posted: Tue, Feb 26 2008 7:46 AM

Apple recently went superslim with their MacBook Air notebook, which they famously demonstrated by slipping it into an interoffice envelope. Now they're following it up with upgrades to their more conventional MacBooks and MacBook Pros. They've utilized Intel's 45 nanometer scale Core 2 Duo processors for the heavy computational lifting with low power consumption.

The new MacBook Pro features the latest Intel Core 2 Duo technology with up to a 2.6 GHz processor with 6MB of shared L2 cache; up to 4GB of 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM memory and up to a 300GB hard drive, plus NVIDIA GeForce 8600M GT graphics with up to 512MB of video memory. Every MacBook Pro now includes a trackpad with Multi-Touch gesture support for pinch, rotate and swipe, making it more intuitive than ever to zoom and rotate photos in iPhoto® or Aperture™ 2 or browse web pages in Safari™; an illuminated keyboard that makes it ideal for dimly lit environments such as airplanes, studios or conference halls and a built-in ambient light sensor, which automatically adjusts the brightness of the keys as well as the brightness of the display for optimal visibility.

Featuring a gorgeous 13-inch glossy widescreen display, and with prices still starting at just $1,099, the new MacBook lineup comes in three models and includes faster processors and larger hard drives across the line; sleek white 2.1 GHz and 2.4 GHz models with 120GB or 160GB 5400 rpm hard drives and a stunning black 2.4 GHz model with a massive 250GB 5400 rpm hard drive, previously only available as an option. The 2.4 GHz MacBook models ship with 2GB of memory standard, expandable up to 4GB across the line.

Every MacBook and MacBook Pro includes a built-in iSight video camera for video conferencing on-the-go; Apple’s MagSafe Power Adapter that magnetically connects the power cord and safely disconnects when under strain; the latest generation of 802.11n wireless networking for up to five times the performance and twice the range of 802.11g; built-in 10/100/1000 BASE-T Gigabit Ethernet for high-speed networking; Bluetooth; analog and digital audio inputs and outputs; USB 2.0; FireWire® and a built-in SuperDrive®. 

Full specs for all the assorted models are available here.




  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,747
Points 42,815
Joined: Sep 2006
Location: United States, California

Any chance HotHardware could do some kind of review comparing a couple Macbooks to similarly priced/featured Windows laptops and list what you guys feel are the pros and cons of each?

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 795
Points 13,650
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: Reseda
Kamrooz replied on Wed, Feb 27 2008 7:55 PM

 Sounds like a good idea...But they are such different systems I don't think it would really be needed. Unless you throw on bootcamp and place windows on the macbook pro also =P.

But imo... Unix > Windows. 

2x Core 2 Quad QX9775 2Gb DDR2-667 Kingston FBDimm 150GB Western Digital Raptor 2x 500 Gb Seagate 7200.10 2x 8800 GT SLI Intel D5400XS (Skulltrail) Gigabyte 3D Aurora 570 Ultra X3 1KW psu 2X Liteon DL DVD-RW Rig courtesy of HotHardware! =D
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,747
Points 42,815
Joined: Sep 2006
Location: United States, California

Kamrooz:
they are such different systems I don't think it would really be needed

I have to disagree. A comparison would end up being more visceral than cerebral though so it may not translate well to a typical review/benchmark format where it mostly boils down to raw data in black & white.

So on that note: I feel that saying "it's not needed" may not be fully stating your argument/position... rather it may not be entirely feasable and/or fruitful since this type of comparison is more about personal preference that can only be gauged hands on.

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 795
Points 13,650
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: Reseda
Kamrooz replied on Wed, Feb 27 2008 11:34 PM

recoveringknowitall:

I have to disagree. A comparison would end up being more visceral than cerebral though so it may not translate well to a typical review/benchmark format where it mostly boils down to raw data in black & white.

So on that note: I feel that saying "it's not needed" may not be fully stating your argument/position... rather it may not be entirely feasable and/or fruitful since this type of comparison is more about personal preference that can only be gauged hands on.

 

I agree to some extent....But no one would be willing to completely drop a platform they are complete use to over another just due to benchmarks and a review. Everyone has their own specifics preferences in which operating system they would prefer. Comparing benchmarks from two different platforms running on different OS wouldn't prove much when you consider the price factor. We've all know that pc solutions are far cheaper than apple, but this isn't a short coming for macbooks considering their operating systems runs on unix. So we'd have to compare to similarly featured and not priced for you'd get much more out of a pc based laptop. But if your suggesting Macbook pro Bootcamp xp benchmarks vs a pc laptop benchmarks, there really would be no need considering you can get far more for your money from a pc based laptop, although performance would be very similar. Although having both Mac OS X and Windows xp is quite favorable, but is it worth the premium when the larger portion of the computer based community is windows based? Who would rather not spend time learning another operating system? I'm not saying it's a bad idea, It would be nice to see some PC and mac benchmarks running the same product suites with the same hardware configuration. I personally would like to see that...but in the flavor of a MacPro single core quad rig compared to a pc equivalent running on a socket 771 system as well. Considering they both run the same family of cpu's it would be quite nice to see.

2x Core 2 Quad QX9775 2Gb DDR2-667 Kingston FBDimm 150GB Western Digital Raptor 2x 500 Gb Seagate 7200.10 2x 8800 GT SLI Intel D5400XS (Skulltrail) Gigabyte 3D Aurora 570 Ultra X3 1KW psu 2X Liteon DL DVD-RW Rig courtesy of HotHardware! =D
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,747
Points 42,815
Joined: Sep 2006
Location: United States, California

Based on your reply, I don't think you undestood what I meant when I said "A comparison would end up being more visceral than cerebral though so it may not translate well to a typical review/benchmark format where it mostly boils down to raw data in black & white."

Essentially I was concluding on my own that this type of comparison is pointless for the reasons you stated which I already realized.

BTW: Strictly on a friendly note - I think I could hang with you in a debate on any topic, I'm just too lazy and you type too fast lol!!!

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 795
Points 13,650
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: Reseda
Kamrooz replied on Thu, Feb 28 2008 2:13 AM

ROFL....My typing speed is a bit excessive =P. But I must admit I love having it.

I completely understood your point of view, but curious on what you mean on a review of the two then? Cause when it comes to a review and benchmarking, that's all there really is...Benchmarking. Really no other way unless you mean a comparison of operating system featurse, advantages, disadvantages, etc. I could get what you mean on that, heck I was thinking along the same lines. To inform the consumers which system would fit their needs better. But when price is concerned people will pretty much always go with a pc.

But I would love to see some macpro and pc benchmarks. A mac pro quad core system with 2 or 4 gigs of memory, and a pc socket 771 system to match (mac pros are socket 771). Memory speed and latency the same, even if possible, two of the same hard drives purchased, one placed in the pc and the other replacing the drive that comes with the mac. Then running a suite of applications in the same environment, photoshop rendering/action scripting with a large base of images to work with, premiere export/encoding to see the difference, 3d modeling rendering etc. I think it would be informative to see what the real difference between those systems woud be. Damn, I would spend the time on a review like that If I had the hardware..I already have the familiarity with 3d apps, photoshop, video editing, for a batch run and testing. Curious to see what the difference in the operating system enviornments of the unix based OSX and Windows would prove in performance. =P

But yea, what would you have reviewed though? I guess I should of asked that question first, because their's not much besides benchmarks in the reviewing community =(. 

2x Core 2 Quad QX9775 2Gb DDR2-667 Kingston FBDimm 150GB Western Digital Raptor 2x 500 Gb Seagate 7200.10 2x 8800 GT SLI Intel D5400XS (Skulltrail) Gigabyte 3D Aurora 570 Ultra X3 1KW psu 2X Liteon DL DVD-RW Rig courtesy of HotHardware! =D
  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (7 items) | RSS