SillyDog701

[Antony]

Apple released MacBook in two colours, the white as in iBook and the new black casing.



MacBook features 1.83GHz or 2.0GHz Intel Core Duo (667MHz frontside bus) with 13.3-inch TFT glossy widewsceen, and 512MB of 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM (PC2-5300) upgradeable to 2GB of RAM. 60GB of Serial ATA hard disk. The graphic card is similar to Mac mini (Intel-based), integrated Intel GMA 950 graphics processor with 64 MB of DDR2 SDRAM shared with main memory.

It's also similar to MacBook Pro, it has built-in iSight camera, 54-Mbps AirPort Extreme wireless networking, Bluetooth 2.0 + Enhanced Data Rate (EDR) and Apple Remote. For communication ports: MacBook comes with one FireWire 400 and two USB 2.0 ports.

MacBook At a Glance:
1.83GHz or 2.0GHz Intel Core Duo
13.3-inch (diagonal) TFT glossy widescreen display
Apple Remote with Front Row
Up to 2GB memory(3)
Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 950
Slot-loading optical drive
Up to 120GB hard drive(3)
Built-in 54-Mbps 802.11g AirPort Extreme wireless
Analog and digital audio in and out
FireWire 400 and USB 2.0 ports
iLife ’06, Mac OS X Tiger

The MacBook weights at 2.36 kg and the price tag starts at US$ 1099.

MacBook (Apple)

Edit, change post mode to normal, 8 Aug 2006

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/418 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/417.9.3

[Antony]

MacBook features new 13-inch glossy widescreen display.

Thanks to a 13.3-inch glossy widescreen display that’s 79% brighter with 30% more viewing area than the iBook before it, MacBook provides the perfect combination of pixels and portability. Photos feel crisper. Movies play vividly. Even daily tasks like surfing the Web and checking email take on a whole new sheen.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/418 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/417.9.3

[Mandrake]

Apple should be credited for bringing out such a cheap dual core laptop. The problem, however, is the $100 US price tag increase over the iBook, as well as the fact that it uses GMA950 graphics!

Surely it would have made more sense to use a cheaper processor and install better graphics than the Intel GMA 950. A 1.66Ghz Core Duo iBook with Radeon X1300 or X1400 would be a far more attractive proposal for people who are after a fast laptop, but still want decent graphics power.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.0.3) Gecko/20060426 Thunderimpala Firefox/1.5.0.3

[Pu7o]

An Intel GMA again...? What are they thinking...

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/418 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/417.9.3

[Antony]

Surely it would have made more sense to use a cheaper processor and install better graphics than the Intel GMA 950. A 1.66Ghz Core Duo iBook with Radeon X1300 or X1400 would be a far more attractive proposal for people who are after a fast laptop, but still want decent graphics power.

I have a feeling it's other way round. More people would prefer to have a faster CPU rather than a more powerful GPU, as many of them are not gamers, professional gamers, or professional photographers.

An Intel GMA again...? What are they thinking...

Cutting down the cost.

And most importantly, you can buy Apple's new super-fast, blogging, podcasting, do-everything-out-of-the-box MacBook through SillyDog701 and support us. Starting as just US$ 1099.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/418 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/417.9.3

[Antony]

The Daily Mac's Stephen Hackett wrote a nice review on his experience with the MacBook.

He mentioned that the new “glossy screenâ€

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/418 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/417.9.3

[Antony]

Macworld has a nice review that answers your questions about Apple's new MacBook.

Questions regarding price, colour, video card etc.

MacBook: What you need to know

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/418 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/417.9.3

[Antony]

Bare Feats has a comparison focused on MacBook's graphic card Intel GMA950, sharing system's RAM.

The result shows that for the same speed of MacBook (13") vs MacBook Pro (15", Radeon X1600 Mobility GPU with 256MB VRAM), playing Quake 4 and Doom 3, MacBook's graphic is a bit disappointing. And even worse than PowerBook 15" (1.67GHz G4, Radeon Mobility 9700 GPU with 128MB VRAM)

http://www.barefeats.com/mbcd3.html

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/418 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/417.9.3

[Don_HH2K]

...even worse than PowerBook 15" (1.67GHz G4, Radeon Mobility 9700 GPU with 128MB VRAM)

That isn't surprising at all. The Radeon 9700 is clocked 50MHz higher than the GMA 950 (450MHz vs 400MHz) and is rated at 200Mtexels higher than the 950 as well.

If you ask me, Apple would have done much better to jack up the price another $50 and stick with the Radeon, or if they were that concerned about the price, use a lower-rating Radeon, even the 9200.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.0.1) Gecko/20060130 Donzilla/1.1PR1 (WML/1.3)

[Antony]

If you ask me, Apple would have done much better to jack up the price another $50 and stick with the Radeon, or if they were that concerned about the price, use a lower-rating Radeon, even the 9200.

It's not just the cost factor. Apple has to balance the space taken by the on board video card, and power consumption etc.

Historically, iBooks have longer battery lives than PowerBooks.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/418 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/417.9.3

[Don_HH2K]

If you ask me, Apple would have done much better to jack up the price another $50 and stick with the Radeon, or if they were that concerned about the price, use a lower-rating Radeon, even the 9200.

It's not just the cost factor. Apple has to balance the space taken by the on board video card, and power consumption etc.

MSI Computer has a few 12-inch laptops featuring ATi Radeon X300SE cards, not to mention that the lightest is .4kg lighter than the MacBook as well. For the performance boost, one less of battery life isn't that bad a trade-off.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.0.1) Gecko/20060130 Donzilla/1.1PR1 (WML/1.3)

[Antony]

MSI Computer has a few 12-inch laptops featuring ATi Radeon X300SE cards, not to mention that the lightest is .4kg lighter than the MacBook as well. For the performance boost, one less of battery life isn't that bad a trade-off.

I can't find any 12-inch laptops from MSI that use ATI Radeon X300SE.
They use ATI Radeon Xpress 200M, UMA ATI RS485M, or GMA 950.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/418 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/417.9.3

[Mandrake]

...even worse than PowerBook 15" (1.67GHz G4, Radeon Mobility 9700 GPU with 128MB VRAM)

That isn't surprising at all. The Radeon 9700 is clocked 50MHz higher than the GMA 950 (450MHz vs 400MHz) and is rated at 200Mtexels higher than the 950 as well.

Not to mention that the Radeon GPU was designed to process pixel shaders and T&L (Transform and Lighting). When an intergrated Intel GPU does any of those more advanced functions it offloads all the work to the CPU in the machine, significantly reducing performance.

Apple could have just offered a slower CPU (1.66Ghz) along with a better Radeon (X1300, X1400) GPU as build-to-order options.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.0.3) Gecko/20060426 Sunquail Firefox/1.5.0.3

[Antony]

Apple could have just offered a slower CPU (1.66Ghz) along with a better Radeon (X1300, X1400) GPU as build-to-order options.

I don't think gamers would settle for slower machines.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/418 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/417.9.3

[Mandrake]

Apple could have just offered a slower CPU (1.66Ghz) along with a better Radeon (X1300, X1400) GPU as build-to-order options.

I don't think gamers would settle for slower machines.

If, for the same price as the current MacBook, gamers could buy one with a 1.66Ghz CPU and a Radeon X1300 or X1400 GPU, it would still literally be three times faster for games than the current MacBook system. Or, if they prefered, they could get the Radeon GPU and a faster CPU - that's the benefit of giving customers choices.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.0.3) Gecko/20060426 Sunquail Firefox/1.5.0.3