Apple, Don't Screw It Up...

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
The MacBook is what I refer to here.



I think the MacBook will be a great hit, if they do the following:
  • Don't put in an integrated graphics chip, like the Mac mini. Apparently components will be shared, between the Mac mini and MacBook. Hopefully this excludes the graphics card.

  • Make the MacBook able to span across multiple screens. They did it with the iMac.

Apple, don't screw it up...
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 43
    fran441fran441 Posts: 3,715member
    Take a look at the low end MacBook Pro. Remember that Apple will not have an MacBook that meets or exceeds those stats.



    That means:



    Don't expect a MacBook Pro with a graphics set like the X1600. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple used a Radeon 9X00 Mobility with 64 MB of VRAM.



    Don't expect a Core Duo of 1.83 GHz (unless it's the top of the line MacBook with a special option). Like the Mac Mini, they will probably top out at 1.66 GHz and we might even see a Core Solo on the low end with Intel Integrated Graphics. I'm hoping this is a machine not for the general public but one that's built for education that comes in at under $1000. A 1.5 GHz Core Solo with 512 MB of RAM, Intel integrated graphics, a 60 GB Hard Drive, a Combo Drive, built in Airport and Bluetooth, and a widescreen display would work very well in many elementary schools.



    Don't expect a MacBook Pro, expect an iBook+. Let's face it. Many people here are hoping against hope that the MacBooks are going to be cheaper MacBook Pros but somehow on par with them. Something is going to set the MacBook line apart from the Pro line and it's not just going to be the screen size. Whether it's a cheap graphics card, a lower end processor than people think, missing features, etc., I think people are expecting too much out of these upcoming laptops.



    It's easy to tell Apple 'not to screw it up', but there have to be reasons to buy the Pro machines as well. Heck, the Mac Minis would be a 'great hit' if they had a 128 MB Graphics card at the same price point. It doesn't mean it's feasible to Apple.
  • Reply 2 of 43
    If you want professional perfomance, buy a macbook pro. Pretty damn simple. I think integrated graphics will be fine for most models of the macbook with an option to upgrade if you want. Saves tons of battery life and is cheaper.
  • Reply 3 of 43
    anandanand Posts: 285member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Merovingian

    The MacBook is what I refer to here.



    I think the MacBook will be a great hit, if they do the following: Don't put in an integrated graphics chip, like the Mac mini. Apparently components will be shared, between the Mac mini and MacBook. Hopefully this excludes the graphics card.
    Make the MacBook able to span across multiple screens. They did it with the iMac.
    Apple, don't screw it up...






    I have a feeling that you are going to be disappointed. Apple is buying off the shelf components to save money. I would be shocked if the iBook did not have integrated graphics.
  • Reply 4 of 43
    robin hoodrobin hood Posts: 513member
    Apple has to compete with Dell. As a result, they will be forced to use integrated graphics.
  • Reply 5 of 43
    What's wrong with the current MBP? Everything I've read and seen indicates that it screams.
  • Reply 6 of 43
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,259member
    You'll likely get %50 of what you ask here.





    Dedicated Graphics? Perish that thought it's not going to happen. The Intel chips are likely more expensive than the G4 they replaced and most laptops in the Macbook range have integrated graphics. As one poster said if you don't like this there's the MBP.



    I'd love to see monitor spanning and I think that's decidedly a non Pro feature especially considering the screen is only 13.3 inches
  • Reply 7 of 43
    krispiekrispie Posts: 260member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Robin Hood

    Apple has to compete with Dell. As a result, they will be forced to use integrated graphics.



    In what way do they have to compete with Dell any more than they did when running PPC processors?



    Then, you choose a Mac or Dell, and did so based on the OS, software and design.



    Now, you choose a Mac or Dell, and do so based on the OS, software and design.



    Being made from the same processor changes this no more than being made with the same model hard drives.
  • Reply 8 of 43
    andersanders Posts: 6,523member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by krispie

    In what way do they have to compete with Dell any more than they did when running PPC processors?



    Then, you choose a Mac or Dell, and did so based on the OS, software and design.



    Now, you choose a Mac or Dell, and do so based on the OS, software and design.



    Being made from the same processor changes this no more than being made with the same model hard drives.




    Not true. The Intel chips are much more expensive than the G4. In the time of the G4 the money they saved by they put into a seperate GPU. Thats not the option anymore.



    So the choice is integrated GPU or more expensive iBook/MacBook. Since the intel graphic chip does the task you now use an iBook for better than the current GPU (I have yet to meet anyone using the iBook for more than casual gaming), I, and probably most non-spec whores, prefer a distance in price between the MB and the MBP.
  • Reply 9 of 43
    fezzasusfezzasus Posts: 36member
    Apple won't 'screw it up'



    however, 'screwing it up' would mean producing a competitor to their own MacBook Pro so the iBook replacement WILL feature the following:



    -intergrated graphics

    -lack of screen spanning

    -smaller feature list in general.



    People hear intergrated graphics and decide that the computer is useless, I am typing this on a 1.33 iBook 12" and didn't buy it for graphics, I doubt few people have because it just dosn't make sense to play games on a cheap laptop.



    Secondly look at graphics benchmarks where the intel minimac and ppc minimac are compared - the intel minimac is considerably better because the new intergrated graphics are actually quite good.



    Again to seperate the iBook replacement from the MacBook Pro there will be a lack of features and i doubt screen spanning will appear on the feature list - the reason for this (and why i believe that they will not have build in iSight cameras) is because they are still aimed at the eductation market where screen spanning is unnessessary. (the iSight would introduce a camera infront of every child and would have over protective parents livid)
  • Reply 10 of 43
    gargar Posts: 1,201member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by fezzasus

    Apple won't 'screw it up'

    [snip]

    Again to seperate the iBook replacement from the MacBook Pro there will be a lack of features and i doubt screen spanning will appear on the feature list - the reason for this (and why i believe that they will not have build in iSight cameras) is because they are still aimed at the eductation market where screen spanning is unnessessary. (the iSight would introduce a camera infront of every child and would have over protective parents livid)




    Well, they'll screw it up if they follow your path and make a MacBook aimed for the so called "educational market".



    To tell the truth: worldwide the educational market for a iBook excists in the US only. Everywhere else they:

    A. don't use Macs.

    B. have Macs in computer labs.



    It's a consumerproduct.

    It needs the iSight.



    And if education is that important, it's easy to stamp out a few thoushand extra BTO educational screens without the iSight in it.



    It would be nice though, if they made a smaller 13.3" MBP with all the features the MBP 15.4" has.

    Priced at $1799 it will sell like hot cake...

    Okay, they sell at least one, because I would buy one.



    Hell, I would buy one anyway.
  • Reply 11 of 43
    Yeah I think Apple will definetly put integrated graphics into the MacBook.



    It makes sense really, plus for general MacBook/iBook users (including myself) I don't think you really need a seperate graphics card as because of the size of the screen it isn't really made for gaming or intensive graphic work.
  • Reply 12 of 43
    fezzasusfezzasus Posts: 36member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by gar

    Well, they'll screw it up if they follow your path and make a MacBook aimed for the so called "educational market".



    To tell the truth: worldwide the educational market for a iBook excists in the US only. Everywhere else they:

    A. don't use Macs.

    B. have Macs in computer labs.



    It's a consumerproduct.

    It needs the iSight.



    And if education is that important, it's easy to stamp out a few thoushand extra BTO educational screens without the iSight in it.



    It would be nice though, if they made a smaller 13.3" MBP with all the features the MBP 15.4" has.

    Priced at $1799 it will sell like hot cake...

    Okay, they sell at least one, because I would buy one.



    Hell, I would buy one anyway.




    BTW. I live in the UK - i know they arn't used here however compared to the education market we are relativly small.



    Apple will not make a miniture version of the Macbook pro because it will take away sales from itself.



    They will not put an iSight camera on it because of the education market and additional price - remember this is a cheaper alternative to the macbook pro
  • Reply 13 of 43
    gargar Posts: 1,201member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by fezzasus

    [snip]Apple will not make a miniture version of the Macbook pro because it will take away sales from itself.



    Not if the price is right. In that case it's a choise.



    I think there is a market for a smaller form factor MBP for a hundred dollar or 2 less than the 15,4"MBP. This market is the market that thinks integrated graphics stinks, white plastics sucks, aluminium ist über geil, backlite keyboard is a must have and above all the 15.4"MBP is to large.



    This smaller form factor MBP steals some sales of the much cheaper iBook/MacBook market and some from the 15,4"MBP market and attracts some buyers sitting on the fence clenching to their 12"PowerBook waiting for this product.
    Quote:

    They will not put an iSight camera on it because of the education market and additional price - remember this is a cheaper alternative to the macbook pro



    No it is no alternative to a MBP and it is a consumer oriented product like the iMac.

    Maybe there will be a cheap Core Solo version without the iSight and remote etc. etc.

    But there will definitely be an iSight equipped iBook/MacBook because the core market of this product demands it or will demand it soon.
  • Reply 14 of 43
    davegeedavegee Posts: 2,765member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by gar

    And if education is that important, it's easy to stamp out a few thoushand extra BTO educational screens without the iSight in it.



    Maybe someone can explain this to me... Given the fact that it's next to fricken impossible to find a cell phone that didn't also have photo & motion video as a permanent/fixed feature of the phone (cept perhaps for Nextel stuff and we all know how many students/kids use that carrier) so, why on earth is it an unforgivable mortal sin (to some of the posters around here) that the Mac laptops and iMacs have a built-in iSight?!?!



    If somebody knows the difference, please explain it to me.... and before people say... well you don't have to carry your cell phone - we all know that people ARE NOT leaving their cell phones home when the go to work or school - unless your job is in an ultra secure hush hush installation of some type and lets face it the number people in those positions wont even register as a blip on the sales sheets.



    Dave
  • Reply 15 of 43
    backtomacbacktomac Posts: 4,579member
    Everyone seems to focus on the hardware. What about the software bundle. In the past ibooks came with Appleworks, a fine little productivity suite. It seems to be on the way out. Will they bundle iworks with it or just some trial version? The lack of a productivity suite would be a big hole for this product in the market it serves, IMO.
  • Reply 16 of 43
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,259member
    Yeah I was a little ticked that my mini didn't come with Appleworks or even better iWork. I'm going to use that more than I use iMovie or iDVD.



    I guess I'll just wait for version 3 and hope that the iWork suite fills out a bit more. Still a little disappointed in Apple in this regard for reducing the choice of Mac users



    I think monitor spanning is a important feature not only for business level people but for the typical consumer as well. I wish Apple had a dock option for the MBP series as well.
  • Reply 17 of 43
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison



    I think monitor spanning is a important feature not only for business level people but for the typical consumer as well. I wish Apple had a dock option for the MBP series as well.




    How important to business people is the builtin iSight?
  • Reply 18 of 43
    gargar Posts: 1,201member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ThinkingDifferent

    How important to business people is the builtin iSight?



    Videoconferencing anyone?
  • Reply 19 of 43
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,660member
    I'm sure this has been covered elsewhere, but out of curiosity:



    Intel specs the GMA 950 as using "up to" 224MB of shared memory.



    Apple specs the Mini as using the 950 with 64MB of shared memory.



    If the memory is shared and not resident on the Intel chip, why the discrepancy?



    Access is access, so I can't see why you'd artificially limit the RAM addressing capabilities of your graphics chip, unless the fact that the Mini ships stock with 512MB of system memory means allowing the Intel graphics to take half of that would mean an unacceptable hit on all-over system performance?



    And if that's the case, would shipping a gig of ram stock and providing "unthrottled" integrated graphics mean a big graphics performance boost, as in the case of moving from a 64MB to a 128MB card (comparing 64MB integrated to 224MB integrated, of course--I get that the shared scheme is slower overall than a dedicated card).
  • Reply 20 of 43
    krispiekrispie Posts: 260member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Anders

    Not true. The Intel chips are much more expensive than the G4. In the time of the G4 the money they saved by they put into a seperate GPU. Thats not the option anymore....etc...



    Sure.



    But what does any of that have to do with this odd notion that Apple now compete with Dell in a different way than they did before?
Sign In or Register to comment.