Well, my dad is using my old 17 inch RevA Powerbook at 1440x900 and I have dislikes explaining to him why the internet shouldn't really be displayed full screen like it would be on a 12 or 14 inch moniter.
But people think bigger LCD = bigger picture when the EXACT OPPOSITE is true.
The internet looks bigger on a 12 inch than it does on a 17 inch which is utterly backwards and disgusting when you realize that that is why most people buy their computers in the first place.
Admittedly, a 17 inch notebook was new at that time and is a bit overkill for web surfing, but I still think display resolutions and screen size are misleading. But most 17 inch notebooks that ship today are not any better in this regard.
So to be clear I am saying that neither extreme (13 inch widescreen nor 17 inch widescreen notebooks) are a great idea unless you need them, although, Apple's latest displays have changed this again somewhat so you kinda have to look at them and see for yourself.
...But if the salesperson is showing you Leopard with the "scaling factor" enlargement turned on, don't expect third party apps to catch up to that one overnight, if ever.
1)People who buy 12 (or 13) inch notebooks often use them for just general internet browsing and word processing and small applications.
2) Widescreens and inflated pixel resolutions do nothing to make the internet look better. They make it looks worse because everything looks "too small" as it was written for 800x600. This includes application software, plugins, and anything else involving fonts that cannot be reasonably enlarged with settings or haxies like Silk, like Entourage and Quicken, unless you think you know everything because you have tried, or without further scrambling webpages, some of which already l have Safari issues.
3) To combat the problem with all these new LCD's, Leopard should ship with the new "scaling factor" made possible with "resolution independant user interface" that can make all your windows look 25% larger so you can read them again. But mostly only Cocoa developers will take advantage of it, leaving the rest of us squinting, and no single setting that works for all of our applications.
4) Firefox is Carbon (right?) so it probably won't be scalable with the scaling factor seetings in the preference pane.
In addition, there might be some regressions or other issues using it (some stuff won't "look right" when scaling factor is enabled.)
IMO Only artists and professionals currently benefit from screens with high maximum resolutions (1600x whatever and up) and when you get one you should get a bigger one, not a 13 inch.
We should all buy 14 or 15 inch notebooks and nothing else for the next 2 years or so until it all gets sorted out and that is my opinion.
Where in the article did you even see mention of resolution?
Where is the support for your "fact" on usage patterns of people buying smaller machines?
I used a 12" iBook then a 12" PowerBook for the last 4 1/2 years and it's been great for school. The portability is unmatched by larger machines with 14 or 15" screens. When I'm at home the PowerBook plugs into a nice large display with keyboard and mouse for a more comfortable computing experience than any laptop normally offers. I've run netbeans, Office, Photoshop, World of Warcraft, omniGraffle etc... I've also used Rational Rose via Virtual PC.
The size of the machiine and its portability also ensured that I'd actually bring it to class rather than let it languish on my desk while I take notes with pen and paper. By the way, notes and diagrams using omniGraffle and omniOutliner kick ass!
Do all usage patterns match mine? Probably not, but I'd be a fool to assume so, especially without any facts backing me.
A 13.3 inch display, especially in widescreen would be a nice bump from the 12" 4:3 screens on the 12" iBook. I'd reccommend one without hesitation.
I'm currently using a company issued Thinkpad with a 15" screen now at 1024x768 and I can only say that I wish I had more resolution. I'd opt for a smaller machine at the same resolution just for easier portability to/from meetings and such.
1) People who buy 12 (or 13) inch notebooks often use them for just general internet browsing and word processing and small applications.
True.
Quote:
Originally posted by rebel_without_a_pc
2) Widescreens and inflated pixel resolutions do nothing to make the internet look better. They make it looks worse because everything looks "too small" as it was written for 800x600.
True.
Of course, one of the benefits of having more pixels is that you can display more things at once without swapping between windows. Having used a 12" iBook (which I loved) and now a 20" iMac...the 20" is a godsend in certain cases.
I would not be surprised if the new iBook does have DVI output.
Its with little doubt Mac Book will use Intel GMA950 integrated GPU which does have a DVI output. It would make no sense for Apple to continue to support only VGA when the Mac Book will come with Front Row. DVI will be the best use of Front Row on an external monitor or HD television with HDMI input.
This does not compete with the Mac Book Pro which supports dual DVI.
Quote:
2) Widescreens and inflated pixel resolutions do nothing to make the internet look better. They make it looks worse because everything looks "too small" as it was written for 800x600.
Most laptops these days are going widescreen. Web development will need to change and support the 16x9 aspect ratio.
I know what you mean. On my mac, I never use windows that cover the whole screen. (I do use the occassional fullscreen app, w/o menu bar, though.) But I do see many Windows users using things like Word and Excel, etc. full screen. Perhaps they just can't stand looking at such an ugly desktop with the "Recycle Bin" or "My Computer"...
Where in the article did you even see mention of resolution?
Where is the support for your "fact" on usage patterns of people buying smaller machines?
Well, I apologize for sounding off like that.
And I do appreciate the Mac user interface, and i know that the article doesn't directly mention resolution, but it is about LCD size- and once you buy one you are stuck.
People buy smaller ones because they are cheaper, especially students.
And I am sure for complex workflows Mac are probably great... developers use nice floating pallates and such instead of cramming everything into a parent window like on MS Windows and such.
But I wasnt talking about that.
I'm just saying that the average moron actually DOES work in one window at a time.
I wouldn't pander to them; but with the growing importance of the internet I wanted to mention it because if you are buying a Mac for a family member or other non-techie I think at that point, native pixel resolution becomes an important consideration over the next few years IMHO.
I'm actually worried that everything will look small on a 13.3 inch and i don't want people to strain thier eyes.
That's a noble goal, but I'd argue that the iBook is aimed squarely at students who aren't a bunch of old dogs trying to learn new tricks.
One of the key features of a portable machine is portability. The machine you bring with you is of much greater value than the one sitting at home because it's a bit too chunky to lug all over campus.
I think the 13.3" iBook is going to be a nice improvement in terms of screen real estate and portability will hopefully be on par with the old 12" iBook.
edit - generally speaking the cheapest laptops don't have the ssmallest screens at all. Most seem to have lower resolution ( 1024x768 ) 14" and 15" screens. That would also explain why a lot of people opt for those screen sizes over the more portable machines. Many people see price as the deciding factor to the exclusion of all else (sadly).
further edit - Apple has been conservative in their LCD resolutions in the past. I wouldn't expect to see 1440x900 on a 13.3" screen. I think they'd shoot for 1280x768(or 800). Pure conjecture of course...
I know what you mean. On my mac, I never use windows that cover the whole screen. (I do use the occassional fullscreen app, w/o menu bar, though.) But I do see many Windows users using things like Word and Excel, etc. full screen. Perhaps they just can't stand looking at such an ugly desktop with the "Recycle Bin" or "My Computer"...
Or perhaps it makes more sense since you're not constantly being distracted by icons, wallpapers, folders on your desktop and other things going on in the background.
I wonder if apple will ever start fitting those multi card readers that HP now fit. They would be fab if they dumped your pics str8 into iPhoto.
I want this too, and it's one of the features I miss from my old HP laptop. Don't listen to the people who call this "crap" or think it'll be some huge inconvenience since as we both probably know, these readers take up little to no space whatsoever.
This does not compete with the Mac Book Pro which supports dual DVI.
the MacBook Pro supports running dual monitors when one is the built in screen. It does not have dual DVI, it has a single DVI port that is dual-link DVI. Dual-link DVI is not the same as dual DVI. Dual-link is needed for higher resolutions, like the max reso on the 30 inch apple display.
but in any case, theres no reason to not have DVI on the ibook, because there is not video chipset that they will use in there thats bad/old enough that it cant support DVI. Expect a mini-DVI port that needs a dongle though.
There should be a higher end ibook that has someting other than the GMA950 too, because the video in current ibooks are already more powerful than the GMA950, and I dont see Apple downgrading performance in the newer model.
Okay, If this IS true, then that means no new iBooks next Tuesday. BUT its been over a month since Apple has announced anything! With this in mind, is it safe to assume that next Tuesday/Wednesday we can expect at least a minor upgrade to SOMETHING?
I was personally thinking today or a week from today would be the perfect time for Apple to pop out those new iBooks, and am very dissapointed with this article.
Does anyone know the LONGEST Apple has gone without a product release?
I want this too, and it's one of the features I miss from my old HP laptop. Don't listen to the people who call this "crap" or think it'll be some huge inconvenience since as we both probably know, these readers take up little to no space whatsoever.
So which cards do you want it to read? Did the HP machine read the different memory sticks, SD, miniSD, MMC, compact flash an XD (I've probably missed a few)? A reader to satisfy all those media types would take up more real estate than it's worth and who would actually use more than the one or two that they need? Why screw up a machine with a dozen slots when most of the time they would go unused? Cameras and other devices come with cables expressly for this purpose. You can stuff a small card reader in your bag and use it as necessary. So now when a particular card goes out of style I'm stuck with a useless hole in the machine?
I don't understand this, if the rumors are in fact true.
It makes sense in the Intel transition if the iBooks and alternative screen sizes of the MacBook Pros are the next products to be released.
But going almost AN ENTIRE FISCAL QUARTER before announcing new Macs, especially consumer grade Intel laptops, seems almost insane.
Especially as everyone expected the iBook to be the first to be Intel'ized.
If they don't have a 4" touchscreen video iPod up their sleeve, next quarter's figures are not going to be good. They're usually good after *I* make a purchase (pure coincidence of course!) but without a 13" MacBook Pro, I'm not going to be buying anything.
Okay, If this IS true, then that means no new iBooks next Tuesday. BUT its been over a month since Apple has announced anything! With this in mind, is it safe to assume that next Tuesday/Wednesday we can expect at least a minor upgrade to SOMETHING?
I was personally thinking today or a week from today would be the perfect time for Apple to pop out those new iBooks, and am very dissapointed with this article.
Does anyone know the LONGEST Apple has gone without a product release?
No one has addressed the fact that the Commercial Times did not cite sources and the article goes on to say the reliability of the report is unknown. I think that Apple will release the new MacBook soon. If you think about it, they would be shooting themselves in the foot by waiting until June. They would loose alot of sales in the education market. Most school systems will buy computers at the end of the school year and do all of the setup and installs over the summer when the students are not there. At least thats how they do it in my home town. I agree with a post that Anders made in one of these MacBook threads: MacBooks in April.
Comments
Originally posted by tensdanny38
how can you declare something as fact and then use the word often to describe it. This is bs. You are an idiot.
But people think bigger LCD = bigger picture when the EXACT OPPOSITE is true.
The internet looks bigger on a 12 inch than it does on a 17 inch which is utterly backwards and disgusting when you realize that that is why most people buy their computers in the first place.
Admittedly, a 17 inch notebook was new at that time and is a bit overkill for web surfing, but I still think display resolutions and screen size are misleading. But most 17 inch notebooks that ship today are not any better in this regard.
So to be clear I am saying that neither extreme (13 inch widescreen nor 17 inch widescreen notebooks) are a great idea unless you need them, although, Apple's latest displays have changed this again somewhat so you kinda have to look at them and see for yourself.
...But if the salesperson is showing you Leopard with the "scaling factor" enlargement turned on, don't expect third party apps to catch up to that one overnight, if ever.
Originally posted by rebel_without_a_pc
Discover with me these important facts:
1)People who buy 12 (or 13) inch notebooks often use them for just general internet browsing and word processing and small applications.
2) Widescreens and inflated pixel resolutions do nothing to make the internet look better. They make it looks worse because everything looks "too small" as it was written for 800x600. This includes application software, plugins, and anything else involving fonts that cannot be reasonably enlarged with settings or haxies like Silk, like Entourage and Quicken, unless you think you know everything because you have tried, or without further scrambling webpages, some of which already l have Safari issues.
3) To combat the problem with all these new LCD's, Leopard should ship with the new "scaling factor" made possible with "resolution independant user interface" that can make all your windows look 25% larger so you can read them again. But mostly only Cocoa developers will take advantage of it, leaving the rest of us squinting, and no single setting that works for all of our applications.
4) Firefox is Carbon (right?) so it probably won't be scalable with the scaling factor seetings in the preference pane.
In addition, there might be some regressions or other issues using it (some stuff won't "look right" when scaling factor is enabled.)
IMO Only artists and professionals currently benefit from screens with high maximum resolutions (1600x whatever and up) and when you get one you should get a bigger one, not a 13 inch.
We should all buy 14 or 15 inch notebooks and nothing else for the next 2 years or so until it all gets sorted out and that is my opinion.
Where in the article did you even see mention of resolution?
Where is the support for your "fact" on usage patterns of people buying smaller machines?
I used a 12" iBook then a 12" PowerBook for the last 4 1/2 years and it's been great for school. The portability is unmatched by larger machines with 14 or 15" screens. When I'm at home the PowerBook plugs into a nice large display with keyboard and mouse for a more comfortable computing experience than any laptop normally offers. I've run netbeans, Office, Photoshop, World of Warcraft, omniGraffle etc... I've also used Rational Rose via Virtual PC.
The size of the machiine and its portability also ensured that I'd actually bring it to class rather than let it languish on my desk while I take notes with pen and paper. By the way, notes and diagrams using omniGraffle and omniOutliner kick ass!
Do all usage patterns match mine? Probably not, but I'd be a fool to assume so, especially without any facts backing me.
A 13.3 inch display, especially in widescreen would be a nice bump from the 12" 4:3 screens on the 12" iBook. I'd reccommend one without hesitation.
I'm currently using a company issued Thinkpad with a 15" screen now at 1024x768 and I can only say that I wish I had more resolution. I'd opt for a smaller machine at the same resolution just for easier portability to/from meetings and such.
Originally posted by rebel_without_a_pc
Discover with me these important facts:
1) People who buy 12 (or 13) inch notebooks often use them for just general internet browsing and word processing and small applications.
True.
Originally posted by rebel_without_a_pc
2) Widescreens and inflated pixel resolutions do nothing to make the internet look better. They make it looks worse because everything looks "too small" as it was written for 800x600.
True.
Of course, one of the benefits of having more pixels is that you can display more things at once without swapping between windows. Having used a 12" iBook (which I loved) and now a 20" iMac...the 20" is a godsend in certain cases.
I would not be surprised if the new iBook does have DVI output.
Its with little doubt Mac Book will use Intel GMA950 integrated GPU which does have a DVI output. It would make no sense for Apple to continue to support only VGA when the Mac Book will come with Front Row. DVI will be the best use of Front Row on an external monitor or HD television with HDMI input.
This does not compete with the Mac Book Pro which supports dual DVI.
2) Widescreens and inflated pixel resolutions do nothing to make the internet look better. They make it looks worse because everything looks "too small" as it was written for 800x600.
Most laptops these days are going widescreen. Web development will need to change and support the 16x9 aspect ratio.
Originally posted by TenoBell
Web development will need to change and support the 16x9 aspect ratio.
I agree...but this will take quite a few years I suspect.
Do people still use programs fullscreen nowadays?
That seems so oldschool Windows-ish
Originally posted by Bancho
That seems so oldschool Windows-ish
I know what you mean. On my mac, I never use windows that cover the whole screen. (I do use the occassional fullscreen app, w/o menu bar, though.) But I do see many Windows users using things like Word and Excel, etc. full screen. Perhaps they just can't stand looking at such an ugly desktop with the "Recycle Bin" or "My Computer"...
Where in the article did you even see mention of resolution?
Where is the support for your "fact" on usage patterns of people buying smaller machines?
Well, I apologize for sounding off like that.
And I do appreciate the Mac user interface, and i know that the article doesn't directly mention resolution, but it is about LCD size- and once you buy one you are stuck.
People buy smaller ones because they are cheaper, especially students.
And I am sure for complex workflows Mac are probably great... developers use nice floating pallates and such instead of cramming everything into a parent window like on MS Windows and such.
But I wasnt talking about that.
I'm just saying that the average moron actually DOES work in one window at a time.
I wouldn't pander to them; but with the growing importance of the internet I wanted to mention it because if you are buying a Mac for a family member or other non-techie I think at that point, native pixel resolution becomes an important consideration over the next few years IMHO.
I'm actually worried that everything will look small on a 13.3 inch and i don't want people to strain thier eyes.
One of the key features of a portable machine is portability. The machine you bring with you is of much greater value than the one sitting at home because it's a bit too chunky to lug all over campus.
I think the 13.3" iBook is going to be a nice improvement in terms of screen real estate and portability will hopefully be on par with the old 12" iBook.
edit - generally speaking the cheapest laptops don't have the ssmallest screens at all. Most seem to have lower resolution ( 1024x768 ) 14" and 15" screens. That would also explain why a lot of people opt for those screen sizes over the more portable machines. Many people see price as the deciding factor to the exclusion of all else (sadly).
further edit - Apple has been conservative in their LCD resolutions in the past. I wouldn't expect to see 1440x900 on a 13.3" screen. I think they'd shoot for 1280x768(or 800). Pure conjecture of course...
Originally posted by Mr. Dirk
I know what you mean. On my mac, I never use windows that cover the whole screen. (I do use the occassional fullscreen app, w/o menu bar, though.) But I do see many Windows users using things like Word and Excel, etc. full screen. Perhaps they just can't stand looking at such an ugly desktop with the "Recycle Bin" or "My Computer"...
Or perhaps it makes more sense since you're not constantly being distracted by icons, wallpapers, folders on your desktop and other things going on in the background.
Originally posted by gremlin
I wonder if apple will ever start fitting those multi card readers that HP now fit. They would be fab if they dumped your pics str8 into iPhoto.
I want this too, and it's one of the features I miss from my old HP laptop. Don't listen to the people who call this "crap" or think it'll be some huge inconvenience since as we both probably know, these readers take up little to no space whatsoever.
Originally posted by TenoBell
This does not compete with the Mac Book Pro which supports dual DVI.
the MacBook Pro supports running dual monitors when one is the built in screen. It does not have dual DVI, it has a single DVI port that is dual-link DVI. Dual-link DVI is not the same as dual DVI. Dual-link is needed for higher resolutions, like the max reso on the 30 inch apple display.
but in any case, theres no reason to not have DVI on the ibook, because there is not video chipset that they will use in there thats bad/old enough that it cant support DVI. Expect a mini-DVI port that needs a dongle though.
There should be a higher end ibook that has someting other than the GMA950 too, because the video in current ibooks are already more powerful than the GMA950, and I dont see Apple downgrading performance in the newer model.
I was personally thinking today or a week from today would be the perfect time for Apple to pop out those new iBooks, and am very dissapointed with this article.
Does anyone know the LONGEST Apple has gone without a product release?
Originally posted by FireEmblemPride
I want this too, and it's one of the features I miss from my old HP laptop. Don't listen to the people who call this "crap" or think it'll be some huge inconvenience since as we both probably know, these readers take up little to no space whatsoever.
So which cards do you want it to read? Did the HP machine read the different memory sticks, SD, miniSD, MMC, compact flash an XD (I've probably missed a few)? A reader to satisfy all those media types would take up more real estate than it's worth and who would actually use more than the one or two that they need? Why screw up a machine with a dozen slots when most of the time they would go unused? Cameras and other devices come with cables expressly for this purpose. You can stuff a small card reader in your bag and use it as necessary. So now when a particular card goes out of style I'm stuck with a useless hole in the machine?
Originally posted by Leonis
The new iBook should have DVI ports as even MacMini has one.
Kinda makes it tough to hook up a display without one on the Mac mini, wouldn't you say??!?
It makes sense in the Intel transition if the iBooks and alternative screen sizes of the MacBook Pros are the next products to be released.
But going almost AN ENTIRE FISCAL QUARTER before announcing new Macs, especially consumer grade Intel laptops, seems almost insane.
Especially as everyone expected the iBook to be the first to be Intel'ized.
If they don't have a 4" touchscreen video iPod up their sleeve, next quarter's figures are not going to be good. They're usually good after *I* make a purchase (pure coincidence of course!) but without a 13" MacBook Pro, I'm not going to be buying anything.
(Apart from that 4" TS video iPod!)
Originally posted by ThinkDifferent
Okay, If this IS true, then that means no new iBooks next Tuesday. BUT its been over a month since Apple has announced anything! With this in mind, is it safe to assume that next Tuesday/Wednesday we can expect at least a minor upgrade to SOMETHING?
I was personally thinking today or a week from today would be the perfect time for Apple to pop out those new iBooks, and am very dissapointed with this article.
Does anyone know the LONGEST Apple has gone without a product release?
No one has addressed the fact that the Commercial Times did not cite sources and the article goes on to say the reliability of the report is unknown. I think that Apple will release the new MacBook soon. If you think about it, they would be shooting themselves in the foot by waiting until June. They would loose alot of sales in the education market. Most school systems will buy computers at the end of the school year and do all of the setup and installs over the summer when the students are not there. At least thats how they do it in my home town. I agree with a post that Anders made in one of these MacBook threads: MacBooks in April.