My objections still apply if the trackpad is clickable like an iPod wheel. I do not l like to drag with the clicker.
Get to liking it. This won't be the same experience, you can use one finger for the move this time, unlike before. You press down and slide with the same finger. How do you drag and drop now? Tap on the trackpad and drag, cause you'll still have that same option.
Engadget, John Grubber and now AppleInsider are saying the combination of the 9400M and 9600M GT will somehow result in better graphics performance than just a 9600M GT.
Engadget, John Grubber and now AppleInsider are saying the combination of the 9400M and 9600M GT will somehow result in better graphics performance than just a 9600M GT.
Usually when you add two chips together, somehow, things are better. Especially when you consider the one of the chips of that two is the only chip in your comparison setup, i.e. and "extra" chip. Seems like common sense to me.
2. Is boot camp going to be changed at all? It was the feature that first caused me to take the plunge from my pc laptop to the mbp and it was perfect, I assume they wouldn't change this?
Somehow, usually when you add two chips together, somehow, things are better.
I wish that were true. This introduces many new issues and we'll have to see how well they have programmed to take advantage or multiple GPUs working in tandem. The last I read on AnandTech a month or so ago, Intel still wasn't able to get their GM45 to correctly switch between integrated and discrete GPUs. Does anyone have any evidence that NVIDIA Hybrid Power is without any major issues?
PS: I don't think there will be two discrete GPUs plus an IGP, but having NVIDIA Hybrid Power does make sense.
2. Is boot camp going to be changed at all? It was the feature that first caused me to take the plunge from my pc laptop to the mbp and it was perfect, I assume they wouldn't change this?
bootcamp is part of the operating system, it has nothing to do with the hardware (aside from the fact that it only works for Intel macs... duh)
Is boot camp going to be changed at all? It was the feature that first caused me to take the plunge from my pc laptop to the mbp and it was perfect, I assume they wouldn't change this?
They'll have to add new drivers to support the new HW, but there is no reason to think that they would remove BootCamp from Leopard. There is also no reason to think that Snow Leopard or other future versions of OS X will not support Windows XP, Vista, or Windows 7.
Sorry, I corrected what I was trying to say in my previous post. My Mac's trackpad isn't working properly these days. It's registering accidental inputs while typing. The option is turned off in Sys Pref and I've tried reinstalling the OS. I think it's a HW issue, but it's quite annoying as I am making way too many typing mistakes these days. \
To restate more thoroughly, I don't see how Apple could possibly not offer FW400, FW800 and a matte option for their Pro machines. If they didn't, they would kill a highly profitable segment of their market.
There's a bit of confusion with 'glossy' displays here. Let's nip that in the bud.
The MacBook, MacBook Air and glossy MacBook Pro varieties use a glossy plastic screen. It's basically a matte display without the matte coating. The theory is that (given the correct lighting conditions) the glossy display allows you to see the true nature of the information without the 'softness' of the matte coating.
The iMac uses a separate polished, polarised sheet of glass that sits in front of the screen itself. The iMac display is designed to 'enhance' the information. It's this enhancement that makes the iMac's glossy screen such a no-go for pros, because what you see on screen isn't actually what's truely there.
That's the crux, right there. The iMac is the equivalent of a pro sound engineer having to make crucial decisions whilst using Super-Duper Twin-Turbo Bass-Boost headphones, rather than his usual neutral studio monitors.
This MacBook Pro snapshot looks like Apple has gone down the iMac's sheet of glass route ? which is an absolute disaster. I would agree that the sheet of glass in the iMac is part of the product design (you can't just simply create a matte version by swapping out the panel), which might suggest that the new MacBook Pro is glassy-glossy only...
IIRC, some of the newer x86 motherboards have similar power saving modes. They incorporate a low-end GPU and then give the option of a more powerful GPU via the PCI-E slot.
Under normal desktop conditions, the system uses the on-board GPU. When gaming, the system switches over to the dedicated graphics card.
A very sensible solution to the power consumption, noise and heat problems of modern high-end graphics cards. No wonder nVidia is now using it in laptops.
There's a bit of confusion with 'glossy' displays here. Let's nip that in the bud.
The MacBook, MacBook Air and glossy MacBook Pro varieties use a glossy plastic screen. It's basically a matte display without the matte coating. The theory is that (given the correct lighting conditions) the glossy display allows you to see the true nature of the information without the 'softness' of the matte coating.
The iMac uses a separate polished, polarised sheet of glass that sits in front of the screen itself. The iMac display is designed to 'enhance' the information. It's this enhancement that makes the iMac's glossy screen such a no-go for pros, because what you see on screen isn't actually what's truely there.
That's the crux, right there. The iMac is the equivalent of a pro sound engineer having to make crucial decisions whilst using Super-Duper Twin-Turbo Bass-Boost headphones, rather than his usual neutral studio monitors.
This MacBook Pro snapshot looks like Apple has gone down the iMac's sheet of glass route ? which is an absolute disaster. I would agree that the sheet of glass in the iMac is part of the product design (you can't just simply create a matte version by swapping out the panel), which might suggest that the new MacBook Pro is glassy-glossy only...
...I hope not.
A sheet of glass of that surface would easily add a few hundred grams to the weight of the MBP, I can't imagine Apple would make such a choice. It'd also seem stupid to me if these new machines strat at 1300 dollars. In the current economic situation, that would mean Apple's market share going back down to 5% or so.
As a few others have alluded, I don't think the leaked Apple model and price list tells the whole story as I can't imagine Apple is making it $200 more expensive to buy the lowest-priced laptop they make. I wouldn't trust what has been revealed so far but we'll obviously know for sure soon enough.
Or MageSafe, for that matter. A magnetic latch certainly isn't a magician, though I can see how it could be deemed magical if this were the 13th century.
This MacBook Pro snapshot looks like Apple has gone down the iMac's sheet of glass route – which is an absolute disaster. I would agree that the sheet of glass in the iMac is part of the product design (you can't just simply create a matte version by swapping out the panel), which might suggest that the new MacBook Pro is glassy-glossy only...
...I hope not.
You make an interesting point about the glass, but from my experience—as best I recall, though it's rather outdated—with glass, CR-39 (plastic) and polycarbonate is that premium glass offers the best option for accurate colour rendering and refractive indexing.
PS: I recall reading about carbon fiber/glass combinations for high-end telescopes that are lightweight while offering excellent accuracy.
(note: My knowledge of optics is pretty dated, so please correct me if I've grossly missed something here)
Comments
My objections still apply if the trackpad is clickable like an iPod wheel. I do not l like to drag with the clicker.
Get to liking it. This won't be the same experience, you can use one finger for the move this time, unlike before. You press down and slide with the same finger. How do you drag and drop now? Tap on the trackpad and drag, cause you'll still have that same option.
My objections still apply if the trackpad is clickable like an iPod wheel. I do not l like to drag with the clicker.
I don't see the objection if you still get the same tactile response from a spring-backed trackpad on the bottom edge.
What websites?
Engadget, John Grubber and now AppleInsider are saying the combination of the 9400M and 9600M GT will somehow result in better graphics performance than just a 9600M GT.
Engadget, John Grubber and now AppleInsider are saying the combination of the 9400M and 9600M GT will somehow result in better graphics performance than just a 9600M GT.
Usually when you add two chips together, somehow, things are better. Especially when you consider the one of the chips of that two is the only chip in your comparison setup, i.e. and "extra" chip. Seems like common sense to me.
2. Is boot camp going to be changed at all? It was the feature that first caused me to take the plunge from my pc laptop to the mbp and it was perfect, I assume they wouldn't change this?
Somehow, usually when you add two chips together, somehow, things are better.
I wish that were true. This introduces many new issues and we'll have to see how well they have programmed to take advantage or multiple GPUs working in tandem. The last I read on AnandTech a month or so ago, Intel still wasn't able to get their GM45 to correctly switch between integrated and discrete GPUs. Does anyone have any evidence that NVIDIA Hybrid Power is without any major issues?
PS: I don't think there will be two discrete GPUs plus an IGP, but having NVIDIA Hybrid Power does make sense.
1. thank god this is here.
2. Is boot camp going to be changed at all? It was the feature that first caused me to take the plunge from my pc laptop to the mbp and it was perfect, I assume they wouldn't change this?
bootcamp is part of the operating system, it has nothing to do with the hardware (aside from the fact that it only works for Intel macs... duh)
so no, it won't change.
Does any of that seem likely in way to you?
what?
Is boot camp going to be changed at all? It was the feature that first caused me to take the plunge from my pc laptop to the mbp and it was perfect, I assume they wouldn't change this?
They'll have to add new drivers to support the new HW, but there is no reason to think that they would remove BootCamp from Leopard. There is also no reason to think that Snow Leopard or other future versions of OS X will not support Windows XP, Vista, or Windows 7.
what?
Sorry, I corrected what I was trying to say in my previous post. My Mac's trackpad isn't working properly these days. It's registering accidental inputs while typing. The option is turned off in Sys Pref and I've tried reinstalling the OS. I think it's a HW issue, but it's quite annoying as I am making way too many typing mistakes these days.
To restate more thoroughly, I don't see how Apple could possibly not offer FW400, FW800 and a matte option for their Pro machines. If they didn't, they would kill a highly profitable segment of their market.
The MacBook, MacBook Air and glossy MacBook Pro varieties use a glossy plastic screen. It's basically a matte display without the matte coating. The theory is that (given the correct lighting conditions) the glossy display allows you to see the true nature of the information without the 'softness' of the matte coating.
The iMac uses a separate polished, polarised sheet of glass that sits in front of the screen itself. The iMac display is designed to 'enhance' the information. It's this enhancement that makes the iMac's glossy screen such a no-go for pros, because what you see on screen isn't actually what's truely there.
That's the crux, right there. The iMac is the equivalent of a pro sound engineer having to make crucial decisions whilst using Super-Duper Twin-Turbo Bass-Boost headphones, rather than his usual neutral studio monitors.
This MacBook Pro snapshot looks like Apple has gone down the iMac's sheet of glass route ? which is an absolute disaster. I would agree that the sheet of glass in the iMac is part of the product design (you can't just simply create a matte version by swapping out the panel), which might suggest that the new MacBook Pro is glassy-glossy only...
...I hope not.
You are right about the single hand (thumb + index) dragging with a click pad though. I wonder if the clickpad will work with both hands?
As such, Apple will also be touting some "sick" battery claims on these new notebooks, our sources claim.
I assume "slick" was meant.
Meanwhile, a couple of sources believe Apple is reading new displays that also sport a DisplayPort connector and MageSafe adapter.
"reading" should be "readying."
Under normal desktop conditions, the system uses the on-board GPU. When gaming, the system switches over to the dedicated graphics card.
A very sensible solution to the power consumption, noise and heat problems of modern high-end graphics cards. No wonder nVidia is now using it in laptops.
There's a bit of confusion with 'glossy' displays here. Let's nip that in the bud.
The MacBook, MacBook Air and glossy MacBook Pro varieties use a glossy plastic screen. It's basically a matte display without the matte coating. The theory is that (given the correct lighting conditions) the glossy display allows you to see the true nature of the information without the 'softness' of the matte coating.
The iMac uses a separate polished, polarised sheet of glass that sits in front of the screen itself. The iMac display is designed to 'enhance' the information. It's this enhancement that makes the iMac's glossy screen such a no-go for pros, because what you see on screen isn't actually what's truely there.
That's the crux, right there. The iMac is the equivalent of a pro sound engineer having to make crucial decisions whilst using Super-Duper Twin-Turbo Bass-Boost headphones, rather than his usual neutral studio monitors.
This MacBook Pro snapshot looks like Apple has gone down the iMac's sheet of glass route ? which is an absolute disaster. I would agree that the sheet of glass in the iMac is part of the product design (you can't just simply create a matte version by swapping out the panel), which might suggest that the new MacBook Pro is glassy-glossy only...
...I hope not.
A sheet of glass of that surface would easily add a few hundred grams to the weight of the MBP, I can't imagine Apple would make such a choice. It'd also seem stupid to me if these new machines strat at 1300 dollars. In the current economic situation, that would mean Apple's market share going back down to 5% or so.
I assume "slick" was meant.
I'd say "sick" was meant.
I assume "slick" was meant.
"reading" should be "readying."
Or MageSafe, for that matter. A magnetic latch certainly isn't a magician, though I can see how it could be deemed magical if this were the 13th century.
This MacBook Pro snapshot looks like Apple has gone down the iMac's sheet of glass route – which is an absolute disaster. I would agree that the sheet of glass in the iMac is part of the product design (you can't just simply create a matte version by swapping out the panel), which might suggest that the new MacBook Pro is glassy-glossy only...
...I hope not.
You make an interesting point about the glass, but from my experience—as best I recall, though it's rather outdated—with glass, CR-39 (plastic) and polycarbonate is that premium glass offers the best option for accurate colour rendering and refractive indexing.
PS: I recall reading about carbon fiber/glass combinations for high-end telescopes that are lightweight while offering excellent accuracy.
(note: My knowledge of optics is pretty dated, so please correct me if I've grossly missed something here)