User Name
Password
AppleNova Forums » Apple Products »

Black Macbook needs REAL GRAPHICS CARD.


Register Members List Calendar Search FAQ Posting Guidelines
Black Macbook needs REAL GRAPHICS CARD.
Page 1 of 3 [1] 2 3  Next Thread Tools
chaos123x
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
 
2006-05-16, 09:44

So it looks like the Mackbook is replacing the 12inch ibook the 14inch ibook and the 12inch powerbook.

The white one is great for the money, but the black one adds $200 dollars to the price for the color and a tiny HD upgrade.

IT seems that the all the MACBOOKS use intel graphics, but what about Pros that want a small laptop to replace their 12inch powerbook? or Gamers that want a affordable dual boot laptop?

For the $200 increase I thought for sure it would have a ATI or Nvidia GPU but no, it does not? (as far as I can see).

Do you think Apple will put a REAL gpu in the high end Black macbook in the next speed bump?

Some people want a small laptop to do their pro work on, and some mere mortals do play videogames on their computer so whats the deal?

Last edited by chaos123x : 2006-05-16 at 10:05.
  quote
neiltc13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
 
2006-05-16, 09:46

I can't believe you're already talking about revisions. The thing's only been out a couple of hours.

And no, I don't think that Apple will put 'real' GPUs in - after all, that's what the Pro is for.
  quote
709
¡Damned!
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Purgatory
 
2006-05-16, 09:53

Jesus. In four tries your didn't get it right even once.

Macbook
Mackbook
MACBOOK
macbook

MacBook
  quote
chaos123x
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
 
2006-05-16, 09:57

Quote:
Originally Posted by 709
Jesus. In four tries your didn't get it right even once.

Macbook
Mackbook
MACBOOK
macbook

MacBook

but really some pros want a small laptop, and gamers need to be able to afford one.

A iMacBook with ATI or Nvidia graphics would be beyond awesome.
  quote
chucker
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: near Bremen, Germany
Send a message via ICQ to chucker Send a message via AIM to chucker Send a message via MSN to chucker Send a message via Yahoo to chucker Send a message via Skype™ to chucker 
2006-05-16, 09:57

Quote:
Originally Posted by 709
Jesus. In four tries your didn't get it right even once.

Macbook
Mackbook
MACBOOK
macbook

MacBook
M4ckb00Kz, LAWL!
  quote
hotch
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Rocky Mountains
 
2006-05-16, 09:58

i just read the whole site, and I'm somewhat appalled at the Black MacBook... Apple is charging a $150 premium just to have black over white... this seems 100% crazy to me.... and I guarantee you they're not going to be passing on this higher margin to us, the dealers.

My Computer: 15.4" MacBook Pro 2.0ghz / 2gb RAM
My TV: 20" iMac G5 2.1 / 1.5gb RAM
I am an Apple Specialist-- I design and install Apple Networks and Pro Solutions.
  quote
Kyros
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
 
2006-05-16, 10:59

$150 for "zomg BLACK!!!!"

The white one is an incredible deal though, 1.83 dual core? I was expecting the low end to be 1.67 single or something like that. I would have been happy if any of the configurations were dual at all. the 1099 price tag is a bit ugly though, I wish they could have done something to bring it to 999, but that probably would have involved cutting some corners in important areas, knowing Apple.

How bad is the integrated graphics really? Say you have enough RAM that the fact that the memory is shared isn't an issue. Does the sharing part slow it down? Also, how does the intel graphics processor compare to real cards? Assuming you put a lot of RAM on it, is this processor a step down or up from the previous one? If it's on par with it, it will be able to run games decently.

Also, I want to know the battery life >
  quote
chucker
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: near Bremen, Germany
Send a message via ICQ to chucker Send a message via AIM to chucker Send a message via MSN to chucker Send a message via Yahoo to chucker Send a message via Skype™ to chucker 
2006-05-16, 11:01

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyros
Does the sharing part slow it down?
Yes; it creates a lag. CPU and GPU cannot access the memory at the same time.

Quote:
Also, I want to know the battery life >
Apple's statements seem to imply that it compares to the iBook's.
  quote
JayReding
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Minneapolis, MN
 
2006-05-16, 11:24

Quote:
Originally Posted by chaos123x
IT seems that the all the MACBOOKS use intel graphics, but what about Pros that want a small laptop to replace their 12inch powerbook? or Gamers that want a affordable dual boot laptop?...

Some people want a small laptop to do their pro work on, and some mere mortals do play videogames on their computer so whats the deal?
It's because those markets aren't big enough to be bothered with. How many pro users are doing pro video editing on a 13" screen? (Other than insane ones, and I know because I tried.) For audio recording, you don't need fancy graphics, and for web development/design you don't either. Only a very narrow subset of "pro" applications require anything more than integrated graphics.

The MacBook is not a gaming machine. It is not intended to be. Apple doesn't seriously compete in the gaming market because it isn't a market they can truly compete in. The MacBook is not designed to play WoW or whatever, it's designed to be a nice light machine for doing basic tasks like organizing photos, emailing, writing papers, and the things that most people who aren't gamers do. PC gamers represent a small minority of overall computer users, and developing a machine to placate them isn't going to generate the sales necessary to recoup the costs in development - if you want to game, buy a MacBook Pro, which is more suited to that end.

Apple is a business, and makes decisions based on what sells, not on what a small group of people might want. The MacBook is a student/teacher/road warrior machine, not a gaming platform and not a professional workstation. You can maybe use it for other purposes, but that's simply not the market that Apple is targeting.
  quote
infinitespecter
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
 
2006-05-16, 13:20

Quote:
Originally Posted by JayReding
The MacBook is not designed to play WoW or whatever, it's designed to be a nice light machine for doing basic tasks like organizing photos, emailing, writing papers, and the things that most people who aren't gamers do.
Except for the fact that it isn't light at all. It weighs as much as the original Titanium Powerbook and more then half a pound more then the 12" Powerbook. Most 13" notebooks are in the 4lb range, not the 5lb range.
  quote
autodata
hustlin
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2006-05-16, 13:28

Quote:
Originally Posted by JayReding
How many pro users are doing pro video editing on a 13" screen? (Other than insane ones, and I know because I tried.)
Well, there was a time when video folks (including me when I did video work) used powerbooks had much lower resolution screens (1152x768) and even until very recently powerbooks had only a slightly higher resolution screen (54 vertical pixels) than the MacBook.
Quote:
The MacBook is not a gaming machine.
The issue is more the absolutely massive drop in game performance, not the fact that the performance is less. Right now, there is no apple portable that plays world of warcraft moderately well. It's apparently either all or nothing, and that's not good.
  quote
Brave Ulysses
BANNED
I am worthless beyond hope.
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
 
2006-05-16, 13:28

Quote:
Originally Posted by JayReding
It's because those markets aren't big enough to be bothered with. How many pro users are doing pro video editing on a 13" screen? (Other than insane ones, and I know because I tried.) For audio recording, you don't need fancy graphics, and for web development/design you don't either. Only a very narrow subset of "pro" applications require anything more than integrated graphics.

The MacBook is not a gaming machine. It is not intended to be. Apple doesn't seriously compete in the gaming market because it isn't a market they can truly compete in. The MacBook is not designed to play WoW or whatever, it's designed to be a nice light machine for doing basic tasks like organizing photos, emailing, writing papers, and the things that most people who aren't gamers do. PC gamers represent a small minority of overall computer users, and developing a machine to placate them isn't going to generate the sales necessary to recoup the costs in development - if you want to game, buy a MacBook Pro, which is more suited to that end.

Apple is a business, and makes decisions based on what sells, not on what a small group of people might want. The MacBook is a student/teacher/road warrior machine, not a gaming platform and not a professional workstation. You can maybe use it for other purposes, but that's simply not the market that Apple is targeting.
Such BS. I know many people who use a 12 inch Powerbook for FCP and other GPU intensive operations. What about Aperture or Motion? They won't even run on it as far as I know.

And all the uses you say the MacBook is intended for can be done on an original clamshell iBook.

Get with the times. It's also not unreasonable to expect kids/teens and even adults to have the desire to play computer games on their computer. It's the way the world is. Ignoring that is simply being an apologist for a company that doesn't listen to you or care about you ($150 premium for a black case is pathetic)
  quote
scooter
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
 
2006-05-16, 14:42

I couldn't agree more. It's a great update but I want a computer I can use for more than checking email and surfing the web. At least offer an option to upgrade the GPU....

What about Aperture and FCP ?

Come on Apple, hook a brother up!
  quote
Kit Fisto
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Fairfax, VA
 
2006-05-16, 14:50

What is Apple's excuse for not offering a Radeon Mobility x1300 upgrade possibility?


Sorry, but Dell is offering such an upgrade and it has 64 MB of built in VRAM and accesses another 64 MB of systme memory when needed.

Such an option would not overlap with the MacBook Pro line.
  quote
Kit Fisto
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Fairfax, VA
 
2006-05-16, 14:51

I do not care so much about processor speed-
a 1.66 Core Duo would be indistinguishable from a 1.83.

But having the 64 MB of dedicated VRAM would get rid of a bottleneck.
  quote
Dr_LHA
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
 
2006-05-16, 14:59

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kit Fisto
What is Apple's excuse for not offering a Radeon Mobility x1300 upgrade possibility?
It would require an entirely different motherboard/case/design?

Please don't compare to Dells, unless you want the MacBook to be 2" thick.
  quote
Luca
ಠ_ರೃ
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Minnesota
 
2006-05-16, 15:01

Also, and someone made this point at another forum I visit occasionally... $150 should buy you dedicated graphics on the supposed 12" PowerBook "replacement," not a black paint job.
  quote
scooter
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
 
2006-05-16, 15:02

I don't see any reason to offer anything beyond the low end model if the GPU is crippled. Who needs a more powerful computer if you can only run applications on it that don't need the added CPU speed. Honestly, what can you do beyond iLife ?
  quote
murbot
Hoonigan
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Canada
 
2006-05-16, 15:04

Quote:
Originally Posted by 709
Jesus. In four tries your didn't get it right even once.

Macbook
Mackbook
MACBOOK
macbook

MacBook
No shit! Damn, I don't usually get into typos and spelling, but holy mother of god man, you spelled it differently 4 freaking times.

Wow.
  quote
scooter
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
 
2006-05-16, 15:07

Not to beat the issue into the ground BUT now that the MacBook supports spanning it would be an awsome small, portable computer for people who travel, but wish to connect it to a larger monitor when at home....
  quote
Robo
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
 
2006-05-16, 15:11

Quote:
Originally Posted by infinitespecter
Except for the fact that it isn't light at all. It weighs as much as the original Titanium Powerbook and more then half a pound more then the 12" Powerbook. Most 13" notebooks are in the 4lb range, not the 5lb range.
It weighs about half a pound more than the 12" Powerbook? That means the weight is comparable to the 12" iBook. And the MacBook is larger.

Why are we complaining, again?

Most 13" notebooks may be in the 4 lb. range, but most are more than $1,099, too. The weight is fine.

and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong
  quote
psmith2.0
Mr. Vieira
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tennessee
 
2006-05-16, 15:11

That's very true, Luca.

I'm not sweating the other two much, for better or worse. However, at $1,499 (and obviously meant to serve as a successor to the beloved 12" PowerBook) that model should've gone the following route:

- Dedicated graphics (64MB, BTO to 128MB)
- Available in white or black (OR BTO to silver, even if it's plastic...no one will know or care; it'll LOOK the part, and,honestly, isn't that all that matters? )
- A single (removable) 512MB DIMM, with an open slot available for the user to upgrade

If just those three things were put into place, I don't think you'd hear many people squawk.

Oh, and maybe a BTO option for the illuminated keyboard?

In the recent past, hasn't Apple announced something and then, merely DAYS later, go and bump a certain spec or feature up quietly? I'm really thinking this silly 2x256MB RAM situation isn't long for this world...

Apple's probably getting an earful on that, as we speak. The graphics thing, the black paint, etc. are all up for debate, I suppose. But when the thing you're REPLACING had a 512MB DIMM built in...there's really no excuse or wiggle room on this one, I'm afraid.

I'll bet by July Apple will quietly address that particular goofy aspect of the new MacBook. It would certainly make it a much more attractive, easier to purchase product. Knowing that I only have to buy myself a 512MB DIMM and I've got a healthy, suitable 1GB. But the current configuration requires work and waste (buying TWO 512MBs to get to 1GB, and then flinging - or trying to sell - the two unneeded, useless 256MB DIMMs).

  quote
Luca
ಠ_ರೃ
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Minnesota
 
2006-05-16, 16:15

Yeah, I'm not as concerned with the lower end models having shared graphics. I mean, they are cheap and they do have pretty powerful CPUs for the price. But the $1499 one really should be a better compromise between the MacBooks and the MacBook Pros, not just another MacBook. Hell, make it $1599, just give it something to differentiate it other than the color and the miniscule increase in HD capacity.

EDIT: To all the people who say the MacBooks have two SODIMMs in order to increase performance by supposedly going dual-channel, answer me this... why, then, do the much more expensive and performance-oriented MacBook Pros ship with a single SODIMM with an open slot? Wouldn't that be kind of like putting a faster hard drive in the MacBooks than in the MacBook Pros, or something along those lines?
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2006-05-17, 05:13

Most HP laptops of simliar size/weight and cost, also come with Integrated graphics.

GMA 965 will be better. The neat thing about Intel is that product updates can and will come a lot sooner. 965 will be available in H2 this year, and should be an improvement in 3D, and much improved memory bandwidth -- so that the CPu and GPU are not competing for access under most circumstances...

So while this is still an integrated solution, I would expect an upgrade before Christmas.

.........................................
  quote
JayReding
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Minneapolis, MN
 
2006-05-17, 12:19

Quote:
Originally Posted by pscates2.0
That's very true, Luca.

I'm not sweating the other two much, for better or worse. However, at $1,499 (and obviously meant to serve as a successor to the beloved 12" PowerBook) that model should've gone the following route:
Except I'm not so sure that's true. Is the MacBook really the successor to the 12" PowerBook like people think? Granted, right now Apple has a hole in its lineup for a pro-level small laptop, but I'n not so sure that's not deliberate. The PowerBook 12" was always the redheaded stepchild of the PowerBook line. Does Apple want people to go with the 15" MacBook Pro instead?

Having used a 12" PowerBook for video editing, it's just not a good experience. Running Motion or other high-end software on an ultraportable just doesn't seem to make a great deal of sense to me - and I suspect that Apple's sales figures showed the same.

I am in agreement that the 2x256 thing has GOT to go. My guess is that Apple got a VERY good deal on 256MB SODIMMs, and when that supply is exhausted they'll go back to a more sensible memory layout.
  quote
Brave Ulysses
BANNED
I am worthless beyond hope.
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
 
2006-05-17, 12:22

Quote:
Originally Posted by JayReding
Having used a 12" PowerBook for video editing, it's just not a good experience. Running Motion or other high-end software on an ultraportable just doesn't seem to make a great deal of sense to me - and I suspect that Apple's sales figures showed the same.
I don't know why everyone on the internet makes this claim of the 12" PowerBook being a poor seller. If anything I see more 12" Powerbooks than iBooks.
  quote
beardedmacuser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: eastmidlandshire
 
2006-05-17, 12:39

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave Ulysses
I don't know why everyone on the internet makes this claim of the 12" PowerBook being a poor seller. If anything I see more 12" Powerbooks than iBooks.
Yep, as I've said before, I see many more 12 inch PowerBooks in use than any other Apple laptop. In fact today at work we had two visitors who both had 12 inch PowerBooks with them.
  quote
Mugge
Thunderbolt, fuck yeah!
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Denmark
 
2006-05-17, 12:39

After seeing the innards of the new MacBook at that Japanese site. I really can't see how Apple should be able to cram another hot chip like the x1600 (or other actively cooled GPU) into that machine. The size probably also had a lot to say. And CPU-wise the MB and the MBP are basically equals, so Apple most likely want's to keep some sort of major performance difference between them.

However, a passively cooled GPU with dedicated memory would of course have been better.
  quote
Partial
Stallion
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Milwaukee
 
2006-05-17, 13:21

Quote:
Originally Posted by beardedmacuser
Yep, as I've said before, I see many more 12 inch PowerBooks in use than any other Apple laptop. In fact today at work we had two visitors who both had 12 inch PowerBooks with them.
I know 1 iBooks user (myself), 1 mbp user(former 15" tibook user), 7 12" pb users. That says it all right there
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2006-05-17, 13:51

We still have little or no talk about the effect on battery life, and I have not seen any mention on Apple's site just yet, but seeing as the GMA is one part of Intel's "Centrino" mobile platform -- with the CPU and I/O control making up the rest -- it might be reasonable to asume that its primary concern is keeping costs AND power drain to a minimum. Something other GPU's may be less good at. Certainly Apple's Macbook Pro advertised battery life numbers are not the greatest out there.

In the PC aisle, a lot of the laptops with the same config as the macbook are branded "Centrino Duo" and sport 6-7.5 hour battery life (advertised). Speaking of, WHAT IS THE BATTERY LIFE, APPLE?

If if is a major consideration, Intel will be shipping a new better GMA 965 in just a couple of months. Updates may come rather soon, I think it's the most we can hope for.

I would say that I/O and standard equipment options are far more important. An Expresscard slot -- something which everyone else manages to incorporate, for example... Another way to make an immediate impact with the premium machine might be to actually offer more competitive installed base RAM and HDD.

A GB of RAM and a 120GB HDD don't actually cost anywhere near what Apple charges to upgrade to that level, and I suspect that Apple will do better in this regard when when they begin to update the machine.

.........................................
  quote
Posting Rules Navigation
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Page 1 of 3 [1] 2 3  Next

Post Reply

Forum Jump
Thread Tools
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Stupid Mac graphics card options Luca Third-Party Products 33 2005-07-01 01:34
New PowerMac graphics card available - GeForce 6800GT DDL Luca Apple Products 4 2004-11-05 16:39
Trading (graphics) cards Luca General Discussion 1 2004-09-22 02:13
new iMac G5 graphics card thegelding Apple Products 33 2004-09-02 20:02
G4 cube Graphics card Miko Genius Bar 5 2004-07-05 12:52


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 18:27.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2024, AppleNova