Leopard driver install may hint at future MacBook plans

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 42
    samnuvasamnuva Posts: 225member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JakeTheRock View Post


    Speaking of leopard and macbooks, has anyone had an install problem where it says "you need to change your install settings....." then it asks you to reformat?

    one of the guys in my wing is having this problem and asked me for help, but I really don't know why...

    His Macbook is formatted correctly already...



    Yea, I did, but with my MP. It's a problem if you have Boot camp runing on the system, just set OSX to install on the mac OSX partition, and it should work.
  • Reply 22 of 42
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by blingem View Post


    If you want your computer to weigh 3lbs and be really small, get a thinkpad. <snip> If you're a college student, you don't have the money for an ultra-portable. MacBooks fit on tray tables and in backpacks.



    <snip> the idea of the ultra-portables having multiple colors is hilarious. Who would buys ultra-portables: business men. Who buys pastel-colored electronic devices? Little girls. Business men and little girls are by definition dissimilar. Have fun selling that colorful, overpriced OSx thinkpad. The rest of the market bought a macbook last fall and gave the pink nano to their girlfriends.



    I agree that the expensive machines should not have multicolours.. and Apple seems to have stuck to that principle too.



    However, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple was looking at a Newton-eMate like design.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EMate_300

    ie iPod Touch functionality in a mini laptop form factor, with a keyboard, and running a simple version of Pages.



    However, that has nothing to do with this integrated graphics rumour!
  • Reply 23 of 42
    lorrelorre Posts: 396member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by blingem View Post


    You think they're going to make macbooks have all the colors of a nano? No way. Thats dell's job. If you want a computer that matches your bedspread, buy a dell.



  • Reply 24 of 42
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    I know I wouldn't buy a MacBook, with a 950, when the X3100 was out and about. The x3100 should provide an nice little upgrade in performance over the old 950 based MacBook. In some respects the performance boost should damn near be excellent.



    On the other hand Intel was real slow with their Windows drivers so we can only hope that this release fully utilizes the x3100. So slow in fact that the open source Linux drivers where in batter shape than the MS Windows drivers.



    Now all I need to do is to figure out how to generate a $1000 in over time.



    Dave





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by superkaratemonkeydeathcar View Post


    Finally! -A goddamned refresh for the MacBooks (and possibly minis) that will give the damn thing Hardware T&L & dx10. (-like apple could avoid it anyway)

    If it isn't crazy now, once ppl find that the MBs can finally do at least -some- graphics without completely Blowing, the demand for them should Ex-Plode.

    If they don't kill the Mini, demand for it too will Ex-Plode if they get the x3100 in there.

    -Finally!



  • Reply 25 of 42
    dhagan4755dhagan4755 Posts: 2,152member
    As laughable and inconsequential as this may be, might the imminent MacBook release be an upstage to this:

    http://www.slashgear.com/dell-latitu...ked-127940.php
  • Reply 26 of 42
    kcmackcmac Posts: 1,051member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DHagan4755 View Post


    As laughable and inconsequential as this may be, might the imminent MacBook release be an upstage to this:

    http://www.slashgear.com/dell-latitu...ked-127940.php



    I like your way with words. I doubt it.



    I am waiting for the next small notebook however. My PB while still very capable is getting a little old in the tooth. I am getting itchy for some new goodies. Especially with Leopard.
  • Reply 27 of 42
    mcarlingmcarling Posts: 1,106member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by KennyWRX View Post


    I don't think a notebook with integrated graphics should fall under the "Pro" line.



    I don't care what Apple call it. I hope the rumored ultra-portable has integrated graphics to keep down the weight, price, and power consumption.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by blingem View Post


    If you want your computer to weigh 3lbs and be really small, get a thinkpad.



    I hope the rumored ultra-portable does not turn out to be a 3lb luggable. The standard in ultra-portables now is 800 grams -- a bit under 2 lbs. However, if Apple offer a 3lb MacBook with greater than 1024x768 resolution, I'll buy one because it would be an improvement over my 12" PowerBook.
  • Reply 28 of 42
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GregAlexander View Post


    Though I see everyone says this is for the MacBook... when the MacMini is equally likely.



    Well I hope if this is the "planned" upgrade for the MacBook that it filters to the Mac Mini.



    This and FW800 or eSATA would seal it for me buying a new Mac Mini.
  • Reply 29 of 42
    X3100 specs off of Wikipedia:



    Quote:

    GMA X3100



    The GMA X3100 is the mobile version of the GMA X3000 used in the Intel GL960, GM965 chipsets.



    Display and render cores can run up to 333 and 500MHz respectively on GM965, 320 and 400MHz respectively on GM960.



    Display unit includes 300MHz RAMDAC, 2 25-112MHz LVDS transmitters, 2 DVO encoders, TV encoder.



    Memory controller can now address maximum 384MiB memory.



    Quote:

    MPEG-2 Hardware Acceleration \tVLD + iDCT + MC

    VC-1 Hardware Acceleration\t MC (for WMV9 only) \t



    Notes:



    * iDCT: inverse Discrete cosine transform

    * MC: Motion compensation

    * VLD: Variable-Length Decoding, sometimes referred to as slice-level acceleration



  • Reply 30 of 42
    mcarlingmcarling Posts: 1,106member
    What features does the Nvidia graphics in the MBP have that the X3100 doesn't have?
  • Reply 31 of 42
    vineavinea Posts: 5,585member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mcarling View Post


    What features does the Nvidia graphics in the MBP have that the X3100 doesn't have?



    drivers that don't suck?
  • Reply 32 of 42
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mcarling View Post


    What features does the Nvidia graphics in the MBP have that the X3100 doesn't have?



    Comparisons of some of the specs:



    Nvidia 8600M GT



    Unifed Shaders (stream Processors): 32



    Core Clock Speed: 475 MHz



    Fill rate: 7.6 Billion Texel / s



    Bandwidth Max: 12.8/22.4 GB/s



    H.264 (full), MPEG-2(full), VC-1 and WMV9 hardware acceleration





    Intel X3100



    Unifed Shaders (stream Processors): 8



    Core Clock speed: 400 or 500 MHz



    Fill rate: 2.133 Billion texel /s



    Bandwidth Max: 12.8 GB/s



    VC-1, MPEG-2 hardware acceleration only







    My guess is Apple chose the nvidia part as their higher end consumer part, while the x3100 will be their mainstream part.



    Unsure why Apple chose the ATI HD2400 / 2600 for the iMac...maybe the 8600M wasn't out yet?





    Another note: if Apple upgrades their AppleTV, I would think they would use a GPU that supports h.264 hardware accel, as this would speed up Quicktime...
  • Reply 33 of 42
    mcarlingmcarling Posts: 1,106member
    Thanks ronster.



    By comparison, the GeForce FX Go5200 in my current 1.5MHz 12" PowerBook seems to have:



    Unified Shaders (stream processors): ?



    Core Clock Speed: up to 300 MHz



    Fill rate: <1 Billion Texel /s



    Bandwidth Max: 9.6 GB/s



    So, the X3100 would seem to offer better graphics performance than the GeForce FX Go5200, which is already fine for my needs.
  • Reply 34 of 42
    iqatedoiqatedo Posts: 1,822member
    Never mind, another day...\
  • Reply 35 of 42
    this may also be for a a mid-range desktop.

    X3000/3100/3500/X3100/X3500 may use the same driver so we may see a mid-range desktop with on video G33 / G35 and pci-e slots.
  • Reply 36 of 42
    vineavinea Posts: 5,585member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mcarling View Post


    Thanks ronster.



    By comparison, the GeForce FX Go5200 in my current 1.5MHz 12" PowerBook seems to have:



    Unified Shaders (stream processors): ?



    Core Clock Speed: up to 300 MHz



    Fill rate: <1 Billion Texel /s



    Bandwidth Max: 9.6 GB/s



    So, the X3100 would seem to offer better graphics performance than the GeForce FX Go5200, which is already fine for my needs.



    Except that, to date, the X3100 has underperformed its paper specs due to bad drivers that are noteworthy even for Intel. 15.6.1 was a big performance step backwards from 15.6 for some folks. I believe TnL is still fubar'd. Intel has also said its not supporting OpenGL past 1.5 and require GMA X3500/X3600 for OpenGL 2.0. Although if Apple is doing their own drivers that might differ for OSX but I doubt it.



    I'd say that the X3100 has been a significant dissapointment...primarily from a driver perspective that it hasn't reached it's paper potential.



    What? Did you think I was kidding?
  • Reply 37 of 42
    So, I was on the phone with a high tier Apple support agent talking about an unrelated issue when we started small talking about Apple, how it's stock is doing so well and after I said "Wait till the results of the holiday quarter come out, there gonna sell a ton of..." he cut me off and said "Especially with the NEW Mac Mini coming out..." Not sure what he knew, but boy was that out of left field. Maybe that's it??? (sorry for the run-on sentence)
  • Reply 38 of 42
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gumashow View Post


    So, I was on the phone with a high tier Apple support agent talking about an unrelated issue when we started small talking about Apple, how it's stock is doing so well and after I said "Wait till the results of the holiday quarter come out, there gonna sell a ton of..." he cut me off and said "Especially with the NEW Mac Mini coming out..." Not sure what he knew, but boy was that out of left field. Maybe that's it??? (sorry for the run-on sentence)



    A new mini with desktop parts and pci-e slots will sell real good also a lower priced mini will also sell as it is a little over priced as it is.



    or he is trying to boost his stock up.
  • Reply 39 of 42
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Joe_the_dragon View Post


    A new mini with desktop parts and pci-e slots will sell real good also a lower priced mini will also sell as it is a little over priced as it is.



    I'm eager to see what Apple does with the Mini & AppleTV. Cheaper and more pervasive would be nice.



    I no longer think we'll see a PC-like box. Apple seems to want to distance itself from that generic look.. it's as if Steve is treating iPods, iPhones, AppleTVs, and iMacs as "Lifestyle Devices".... kinda like "forget what's inside the box, this device is cool". He wants to redefine what we do.... and as he pulls users into Apple's reality, a standard PC box would pull users in the other direction.



    - The Mac Mini's interesting... it's tiny... and for some people the thought is "I can get rid of this ugly old box and just have this tiny thing? and it's super fast?!". It still breaks the image of what a computer is.



    - The laptops don't have that much flexibility... they don't help or hinder the new reality.

    - The MacPros and xserves break my theory... but they're positioned as very high end workstations so perhaps Apple is safe-ish
  • Reply 40 of 42
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vinea View Post


    Except that, to date, the X3100 has underperformed its paper specs due to bad drivers that are noteworthy even for Intel. 15.6.1 was a big performance step backwards from 15.6 for some folks. I believe TnL is still fubar'd. Intel has also said its not supporting OpenGL past 1.5 and require GMA X3500/X3600 for OpenGL 2.0. Although if Apple is doing their own drivers that might differ for OSX but I doubt it.



    I'd say that the X3100 has been a significant dissapointment...primarily from a driver perspective that it hasn't reached it's paper potential.



    What? Did you think I was kidding?



    That's exactly what I've read all over the 'net too. In essence, under Windows the X3100 is hardly and improvement over the GMA 9xx series at all.

    Who writes the OSX drivers for Intel graphics? And who the Windows drivers for Apple hardware included in BootCamp? Would there be any hope that a X3100 OSX driver would seriously outperform the old MacBooks' GMA 9xx?
Sign In or Register to comment.