
Apple's all-new MacBook Pro - noodle
http://www.engadget.com/2008/10/14/apples-all-new-macbook-pro-packs-new-nvidia-gpu-glass-trackpad/
======
mdasen
I'm a tad frustrated. I love Apple and the Mac OS, but sometimes it really
gets to be that the Mac space is a one supplier game. Apple has decided for me
that I like glossy screens. I was pretty sure I hated them, but I guess Apple
must be right. I also hate real buttons I guess. I'm looking forward to when
Apple replaces my keyboard with a pretty glass piece as well.

I really need a new laptop (PowerBook is ready to kick the bucket), but at a
certain point Apple needs to understand that some of its users are decently
traditional and just really, really like the Mac OS. I feel like if Apple had
to compete with other Mac OS players, I'd get a better deal and better
products. Apple is making great things right now, but they're also trying to
force you into a corner by saying "if you want the good Mac OS stuff, you have
to put up with everything else we want to push on you".

Maybe I'm the only one who feels like Apple is getting arrogant with their
marketshare. Maybe this isn't parallel to how Apple previously got arrogant
and lost nearly all its marketshare. Maybe I don't want to go back to the dark
days when I was openly mocked for my Mac choice.

~~~
unalone
I would guess that the glossy screen is necessary for the construction of the
computer. Is glass-and-matte possible? (I'm not knowledgeable here; I might be
wrong.)

~~~
Prrometheus
I won't use a glossy screen. If all Mac offers is glossy, then I won't use
Mac.

This is why I didn't get a Dell Ubuntu laptop.

~~~
pmorici
Then buy a 17 inch MacbookPro... There was no mention of discontinuing those.

------
petercooper
What a shame Apple's releases today have stirred up a cauldron of
disappointment and inconsistency. No significant spec upgrades, prices have
gone up (in the UK, at least) - we've gained slightly better video, a glass
trackpad, a new case, and an SSD option.

With computer prices falling (generally), it's remarkable that Apple hasn't
responded to that at all. Even the old MacBook they're trying to pass off as
the new entry level one is £20 more than the same machine was yesterday (yet
$100 less in the US).

Apple has muddied the whole notebook range. The MacBook now comes in _two
totally different styles_ , as does the MacBook Pro (with the 17" now being a
particularly poor deal, despite the increased standard res.) And what's with
the new Cinema Display? Looks nice, but it's not workable for Mac Pro users
(the market Cinema Displays were meant to be for) and it's heavily overpriced.
It's really just an accessory for only the newest releases.

Apple was making good progress at bringing pro-level technology to the user at
prosumer prices, but this whole update has sent them back into the
stratosphere. The entry level "new" MacBook is over £200 ($400) more than the
old entry level MacBook.. how can I recommend this to my PC-switching family
now?

~~~
alaskamiller
Apple goes through transitional phases, if it could have lopped off that white
macbook completely it surely would have. And as with any good Apple faithful
knows, you don't buy version 1. If you really want a laptop it's best you wait
until next Feb when the specs are updated again and the kinks worked out.

This then brings into question what WILL get updated during MacWorld. I'm
thinking SnowLeopard, Mac Pro/Mac mini, Apple TV, and iPhone.

~~~
jwilliams
> And as with any good Apple faithful knows, you don't buy version 1.

This is really true. A style change is a big upgrade in Apple terms. The next
release of this will likely pack a lot more features.

~~~
anr
Also, you can wait for a notebook with a mobile version of Core i7, when Intel
finally catches up with everything AMD has to offer (eg integrated memory
controller).

Q2 next year?

------
brandonkm
I think both the new MacBook and the MacBook pro are great. Aesthetically
Apple nailed it. The increased graphics capacity will no doubt be a hit with
the graphic design and production crowd. The screen looks mint and the
trackpad will no doubt probably become standard on all mac laptops from now
on. Seems everyone is always wanting that "something more" but for someone who
was holding out from buying a MacBook because I knew new ones were on the
horizon, these are excellent.

------
jmatt
For some reason it looks like an old circa 2004 dell laptop to me. It's the
black keys with the silverish case. I haven't seen one in person but that is
my immediate impression.

I'm a proud owner of a black macbook - which I love. And I think the previous
macbook pros look good. Maybe I just need to see one in person, where I can
see all the "detail".

That, plus the permanent glossy screen, is a deal breaker. I won't be
upgrading anytime soon. Maybe the next revision will give it a new feel or
look.

~~~
rbanffy
As someone being forced to use a Dell D630 notebook for work, I can tell you
there is a world of difference between any Mac and any Dell...

------
aerocapture
What I really want to do is buy one of these at about a 30% discount, sans
MacOS, and run Kubuntu on it.

~~~
speek
but but but... OS X is really great! I like the *buntus, but I think that OS X
is a little more polished and solid.

~~~
unalone
Yeah. You don't get a Macbook just for the aesthetic - though the aesthetic
_is_ tremendous. You get it for the operating system.

~~~
sunkencity
well, it's a sexy machine to run linux on too, when you are too frustrated
with manually compiling tarballs or fighting with the ports system.

~~~
unalone
True. And I'd _imagine_ that the drivers for Mac computers are all completely
covered in Linux, considering there's not, ahem, too much variety to pick
from. So that's an advantage.

------
timtrueman
Anyone know where I can find more information on the SSD they offer? (e.g. MLC
or SLC?)

------
allenbrunson
it looks very pretty. the no-seams aluminum case looks cooler than i thought
it would, and makes my four-month-old macbook pro look dated by comparison.

i think the glossy screen is a deal-breaker for me, though. i'm hoping the
next round will add a matte option.

~~~
kylec
To be fair, the MacBook pro has looked dated for a while. The design is nearly
identical to the aluminum PowerBook G4 that came out in 2003:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerBook_G4#Aluminium_PowerBoo...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerBook_G4#Aluminium_PowerBook_G4)

~~~
karmaVS
Whereas the new design looks like the TiBook that preceded it.

------
wenbert
all glossy screen :-( never liked them. for me, coding on non-glossy screens
are better.

------
Kilimanjaro
They saved the "brick" and the netbook for Januarys Mac World.

~~~
cbarning
"Brick" is the process that makes the Aluminum body of the laptop.
<http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/design.html>

------
symptic
At least it looks great.

------
weegee
the Macbook keyboard takes some getting used to. it's a shame they moved away
from the nicer keyboards on the old Macbook Pros. I use a bluetooth keyboard
while at home with my Macbook as well as an external monitor, which makes it a
lot nicer. Also leaving Firewire 400 off is interesting, as I prefer it to USB
2.0 for the higher speed. Looks like I'll not be buying another Macbook for a
while.

~~~
SwellJoe
_Also leaving Firewire 400 off is interesting, as I prefer it to USB 2.0 for
the higher speed._

If you mean "lower" when you say "higher", then your statement is true.

USB 2.0 is 480 Mbps. Firewire 400 is...100, 200, or 400 Mbps. Firewire 800, on
the other hand, tops out at 800 Mbps, but uses an incompatible cable type,
thus making it even less common than Firewire 400, and practically useless
except for folks doing high end video work (since those are the only devices I
can think of that still ship with 1394 interfaces...maybe some audio devices
do, too).

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Serial_Bus#USB_2.0>

Popular standards are good. Embrace them. Particularly when they are clearly
superior, as USB 2.0 is.

~~~
Oompa
480 Mbps is theoretical speed. Most things don't reach that. In real life
usage, Firewire 400 tends to be quicker than USB 2.0, or at least that's the
case from my experience.

~~~
ken
I keep hearing "theoretical speed" applied to USB, as if there's some theory
under which one would be able to get 480 Mb of data transferred in one second.

No, 480M is the baud. (Download the USB 2.0 spec and check out the wire
protocol.) The fastest you can transfer data is with a bulk transfer, which
top out at 53248000 Bps = 406.25 Mbps. ( _That's_ what I would call the
"theoretical speed".) Other transfer types are slower.

Companies like advertising "480 Mbps" because it's a high number, but it's not
physically possible to transfer data over USB2 that fast.

~~~
Oompa
Thanks for the correction, always nice to learn more :)

