Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Apple Businesses

MacWorld Keynote Announces x86 iMac & Laptop 1607

Posted by Zonk
from the watch-him-talk dept.
Steve Jobs began giving his keynote at 9am local time, PST. The action was posted live at MacRumorsLive, and Engadget. From the Engadget liveblog: "How many [iPods] did we sell last quarter? Some of the estimates were getting astronomical - 8 million, 9 million. I'm really pleased to announce that last quarter we sold 14 million iPods .. that is over a hundred every minute, 24/7 throughout the quarter. And it still wasnt enough. We've now sold over 42 million iPods -- as you can see the curve is going up again" MacWorld and Ars Technica has coverage as well. The shiniest news: MacBook Pro. iSight, Front Row; $1999 1.67 Core Duo; 667 DDR bus, Radeon x1600; $2499 1.83GHz. Intel chip.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

MacWorld Keynote Announces x86 iMac & Laptop

Comments Filter:
  • Thanks (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Colourspace (563895) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @01:51PM (#14438102)
    Thanks, but for the rest of us non Apple fanboys it's good enough.
  • by John Harrison (223649) <johnharrison AT gmail DOT com> on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @01:54PM (#14438137) Homepage Journal
    Can you load easily dual boot Windows on the new iMac and on the MacBook Pro? If you can then this opens up a new market of tepid switchers. It seems that Steve didn't mention this sort of functionality at all which leaves it as a big question mark for now.
  • by godawful (84526) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @01:55PM (#14438138)
    well, that was pretty decent, but kind of strange, yes new powerbooks were to be expected, but now the imacs are faster then the low and midrange powermacs.. i'm assuming in a few weeks we'll see them all go quad core..

    i wonder how long till ibooks and mini's
  • MacBook Pro (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Have Blue (616) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @01:56PM (#14438170) Homepage
    We CANNOT allow "MacBook Pro" to take off. Everyone needs to keep calling them Powerbooks. I don't care what Apple says. If customers keep coming into the stores asking for Powerbooks maybe they will come to their senses.

    Really, all the top Mac news sites and blogs need to get on board with this. It is NOT a "MacBook Pro". It is and always will be a Powerbook.
  • Windows? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by anothermortal (577394) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @01:59PM (#14438213) Homepage
    I guess the real question is can it run Windows, Linux and OS X? What kind of black magic will we need to do to make it work?
  • Unimportant... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Savage-Rabbit (308260) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @01:59PM (#14438227)
    Macbook sounds offensive and computer illiterate.

    What do you guys think?


    The art of choosing strategically well thought out product names is a declining art these days, I need only point to "Windows Defender". While most of us nerds know that Windows is on the defensive in the malware department there is no reason to let the uninitiated masses of Windows users know about it, they think the current situation is normal.

    Not that I really care about the 'stupidity' of the MacBook name and I do agree with you that it is kinda clumsy. What I care about is what this MacBook can do and how soon I can get my filthy paws on one. Now if you will excuse me I have to go and empty my piggybank....
  • FIrewire 800 (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Seanasy (21730) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:00PM (#14438242)

    What happened? Where's the Firewire 800? I can understand, maybe, leaving it off the iMac but surely the MacBook should have one? My 15" Powerbook has Firewire 800. I just don't get it. I can't imagine they'd abandon Firewire for USB.

  • 4X faster? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by muyuubyou (621373) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:04PM (#14438287)
    Dude, that sounds to me like "all our previous benchmarks were bogus"!

    Next time you know they will say "now with twice the mouse buttons and productivity!"
  • Re:Stupid name (Score:2, Insightful)

    by heinousjay (683506) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:05PM (#14438297) Journal
    The USB ports are split on the current PowerBooks as well. You sacrifice a little to have a laptop with such a slim chassis.
  • Re:MacBook Pro (Score:3, Insightful)

    by the web (696015) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:06PM (#14438312)
    Bbbut, they still sell power books... :(
  • Re:Don't like it (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Fatmiko1 (669247) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:06PM (#14438327) Homepage
    It's not a premium, though. This is the problem with PeeCee guys. --- build the identical comparison machine on dell's or sony's website, make the dell and sony do exactly what the mac does, then come talk. They are usually the same price at that point. Apple doesnt sell crap that doesnt do anything for you. They build machines that have wireless and bluetooth, and fast hard drives and such, and if you want it, you buy it, if not, there is no crap, 500 laptop. They dont waste your or their time. Sorry kids....
  • Re:Stupid name (Score:2, Insightful)

    by dirty (13560) <dirtymatt&gmail,com> on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:06PM (#14438331)
    It looks almost exactly like the previous generation of PowerBooks did, just darker. Also, Apple has split the USB ports for quite some time now, and personally I like it.
  • by patiwat (126496) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:08PM (#14438352)
    The product mix has stopped making sense, although only temporarily. In the portable line they have iBook G4 and MacBook Pro intel; in the desktop line they have iMac intel and PowerMac G5.

    iMac that's as powerful as a PowerMac? Who's gonna wanna buy PowerMacs for the next couple months? Does Apple expect to make so much profit from the iMac intel over the coming months than the forgone profit from lost PowerMac G5 sales? I would think that the PowerMac G5 made a much higher profit than the iMac.

    And a MacBook Pro that's 10x more powerful than a iBook?!? There goes the iBook market...

    Anybody else see the logic of transitioning the consumer desktop and pro laptop first, rather than starting with the consumer desktop and laptop, or the pro desktop and laptop, or the pro desktop and consumer laptop, or some other combination?
  • Re:Chip Speed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by JPamplin (804322) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:09PM (#14438360) Homepage
    The Yonah architecture is the next generation of the Pentium-M - the mobile chip first designed by their Israel design team. It's small, faster at lower clock speeds, and uses less power than the Pentium 4 chips, which you are referring to.

    This is a dual-core 2Ghz Yonah which I daresay will blow the doors off of a 3Ghz P4 Prescott, and run much cooler, which is necessary in a case that thin (the iMac case) when coolers are space-limited.

    Did you post anonymously because you knew that was just a stupid question, or are you just now figuring this out?

    Keep it up, genius. ;-)
  • Re:MacBook Pro (Score:0, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:13PM (#14438416)
    It was called a Powerbook because it used a powerpc processor. It doesn't any longer, so why should it be called a powerbook? That's ridiculous.
  • Re:Stupid name (Score:2, Insightful)

    by geemon (513231) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:14PM (#14438438)
    Savvy move to a new naming convention. Instead of maintaining two brand lines (Powerbook and iBook), Apple can now simply market the MacBook Pro (nee Powerbook) and in the future the consumer level MacBook (nee iBook). Presents a nice unified look to their portables line that is more in tune with their iPod branding strategy of using the suffix to distinguish differences.
  • Re:Stupid name (Score:5, Insightful)

    by moonbender (547943) <moonbender@@@gmail...com> on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:15PM (#14438450)
    I always considered that a feature, and missed it in my laptop. Routing cables around the laptop because there are only ports on one side, that's ugly.
  • iMac that's as powerful as a PowerMac?

    Only if you don't mind getting "Rev A.".

    And... only if you recompile.

    It's only 2-3X faster, which means that running apps under Rosetta will be like running 68000 apps on the first Powermacs, slower on existing applications than the products they replace. That's OK for keyboard-bound apps like Office, but it's not going to be enticing for people actually doing real work for at least 6 months.

    The MacBook is closer to being a realistic upgrade right now, because the faster memory bus makes a bigger difference.
  • by denjin (115496) <denjin@@@myway...com> on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:16PM (#14438457) Homepage
    Sorta annoyed me too, but at least we have an ExpressCard slot. Should be some decent peripherals for it at some point.
  • Re:MacBook Pro (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:16PM (#14438460)
    Except Apple was calling its notebooks "Powerbooks" before the PowerPC processor existed.
  • Battery Life? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by blackmonday (607916) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:16PM (#14438469) Homepage
    Any word on the expected battery life of the MacBook Pro? I couldn't find any info anywhere, so I'm expecting it to be adequate at best. This is the laptop that finally replaces my 867 powerbook, but I might wait until the first revision. Battery life and heat ouptut are big considerations for me.

  • I feel abused (Score:4, Insightful)

    by el_womble (779715) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:16PM (#14438470) Homepage
    2x faster? 4x faster?

    We've been lied to horribly for the last 3-4 years. Clock for clock intels are as powerful as PowerPC. So when I bought my 1.8GHz iMac G5 it was already slower than equivalent PCs. Now thats all very well and good, except that Apple were screaming that it was faster, better, stronger. That you would be mad to even think about buying Intel, and I sucked it up. Its not even like they didn't know the truth. They've been developing Mac OS X on intel for the last 5 years, so they new they were onto a looser with PowerPC and they still over sold.

    Now I'm very happy with my Mac, but the smug sense of superiority that I bought with the Mac has been wiped out. I miss being inside the RDF.

  • by javaxman (705658) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:17PM (#14438482) Journal
    we sold 14 million iPod ... ... and most of them are obsolete as of today!

    Nice to see you've been properly modded as flamebait. That wasn't said because that was 14 million iPods sold this holdiday season. So those are all completely new iPods, nanos or video. Since "only" 42 million iPods total have been sold, then less than 70% of all iPods sold up to this point are "obsolete" where "obsolete" means 'are not the same as the current model'. Which is of course a stupid definition that only a troll would use in this case; all iPods work just fine and are fully supported by iTunes, what's obsolete about even a first generation iPod? They play music and work with a Firewire-capable computer just fine.

    Actually, since sales have been taking off so dramatically, it's likely that nearly half of all iPod sales were in the past year, making your comment look even more lame, which is pretty difficult...

  • by tktk (540564) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:22PM (#14438563)
    From the commentary on the various live feeds, it sound more like Apple re-invented Flickr.

    That's what it sounded like to me. I can't check the Apple site since its slowed to a crawl.

  • Re:FIrewire 800 (Score:2, Insightful)

    by HarveyTheWonderBug (711765) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:23PM (#14438570)
    It seems that USB 2.0 may have eaten Firewire's lunch -- speeds are comparable

    Hum, firewire 800 delivers 800 Mb/s, against 480 Mb/s for USB 2. Sorry, but that makes a difference when accessing loads of data/backup/video on external transportable Terabyte disks. I'd rather have Apple stick to Firewire 800 for longer... But they have a history of not listening to customers Oh well...
  • by MysteriousPreacher (702266) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:26PM (#14438605) Journal
    Only difference, Apple is running OSX, so Apple should charge less then the Acer Travelmate, Acer has to pay Microsoft for Windows, Apple doesn't have to pay anybody for OSX.


    Um, doesn't it normally cost money to develop software? Silly question I know but I'm fairly sure that and OS doesn't just fall from the sky followed on a regular basis by updates. I'm forever having to clean those annoying binaries from the gutters on my roof.
  • Re:The MacBook Pro (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tak amalak (55584) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:27PM (#14438607)
    Sure but you'd still not be able to run MacOS X, the purpose behind getting a Mac in the first place.
  • by christor (663626) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:27PM (#14438609)
    So it's obvious that they want to include "mac" - focusing the brand. And now we're likely to have the MacBook (formerly iBook) when it's released and the MacBook pro.

    We also have the iMac and PowerMac - probably will become MacPro?

    MacBook Pro, as others have observed, is not a good name. It's quite clunky - I keep thinking of the word "brick" when I say it - not a good image when applied to a laptop. My suggestion if they really want to ditch "Power":

    iBook - ProBook

    iMac - ProMac Simple, and more Apple-like I think.

  • by The Phantom Mensch (52436) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:29PM (#14438634)
    I think you have to turn the question around and ask yourself: What can Apple meet the demand for now? This makes the product rollout a little more sensible. Apple probably couldn't sell an Intel iBook laptop for $1299 right from the start and meet the demand. They definitely couldn't do that with a $499 Mac mini. But the pro laptop will sell to anyone that has a PowerMac G5 for their heavy CPU work on legacy apps that aren't yet in a Universal binary. And a consumer desktop will sell because most consumer desktop users don't install much more than the already bundled iLife and maybe Office and some games.
  • Re:Firewire 800 (Score:4, Insightful)

    by LionMage (318500) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:30PM (#14438651) Homepage
    Professional musicians and DV camera users (i.e., users of pretty much any worthwhile camcorder, consumer or professional) will need FireWire still. So I don't think we'll see FireWire 400 disappear any time soon. But I fear its days are numbered, especially if the consumer electronics industry decides to kill FireWire in the few niche areas it's still viable. The pro and prosumer segments may keep it alive even then.

    It's worth noting that FireWire 400 is present and accounted for on the MacBook Pro, so no need for USB->FireWire dongle adapters. Yet.

    In the case of the iPod, it makes sense to focus on a single interface that is a "least common denominator" among users -- and while many PCs lack IEEE 1394 ports, all modern PCs have USB 2.0, and all modern Macs have USB 2.0 as well. So eliminating FireWire support from the iPod is a great cost-saving measure that increases Apple's profit margin and streamlines the product design moving forward.
  • by NilObject (522433) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:32PM (#14438670) Homepage
    And a MacBook Pro that's 10x more powerful than a iBook?!? There goes the iBook market...


    The iBook is 1/2 the price of the MacBook Pro, which is enough of a differentiation, really. But yeah, that MacBook Pro is one juicy piece of hardware. You're right, though, it's certainly an awkward product lineup.

    I believe the current "funk" in the product line is entirely a product of the fact that the transition to Intel is going to be uneven as the engineering teams work on each individual model to bring them in to the Intel future. The iMac is equivalent in power to a PowerMac, it looks like, which only bodes well for the next PowerMac ("MacDesktop Pro"? "Mac Pro"?) - that puppy will be one seriously powerful monster.

    But like Steve said, they'll be transitioning them throughout the year. I imagine that once all the machines are moved over, the pricing will settle a bit and we'll get back our 12" and 17" laptop models.

    My 12" PowerBook used to seem so powerful... Cripes.
  • by aristotle-dude (626586) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:33PM (#14438693)
    Not all pro level apps will run on these machines until they are updated to Universal Binaries. That is the advantage the Powermacs have at the moment.
  • Re:Stupid name (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Logic Bomb (122875) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:35PM (#14438708)
    Unfortunately, the product looks less like an Apple product and more like a laptop from a company that rhymes with "Hell".

    Um... huh?! It looks exactly like the current aluminum PowerBooks, an original Apple design. The reason Dell and others are no making laptops with silver-ish plastic cases is because of Apple's stuff.

  • Re:Low Resolution (Score:2, Insightful)

    by bnenning (58349) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:37PM (#14438745)
    Am I the only person who thinks that 1440x900 is a pretty low resolution for a 15" laptop?

    The previous 15" Powerbooks had 1280x854, so it's actually an increase. Not everybody has perfect eyes, so Apple's making compromises. Hopefully they'll get OS X's resolution-independent UI working soon and then go with as many pixels as possible.
  • by TrumpetPower! (190615) <ben@trumpetpower.com> on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:38PM (#14438755) Homepage
    patiwat wrote:

    The product mix has stopped making sense, although only temporarily. In the portable line they have iBook G4 and MacBook Pro intel; in the desktop line they have iMac intel and PowerMac G5.

    You're forgetting that they've also got all the machines they were selling yesterday.

    iMac that's as powerful as a PowerMac? Who's gonna wanna buy PowerMacs for the next couple months?

    Lots of people. If you need internal expansion, it's all you've got. And, if you rely upon any high-performance software, you'd be a fool to switch to Intel until there're native versions available.

    And a MacBook Pro that's 10x more powerful than a iBook?!? There goes the iBook market...

    Except that the base price of this new laptop is about what you'd pay for the top-of-the-line iBook maxed out with RAM, extended warranty, and the like. And, while it's faster, it's not gonna be ten times as fast. Today's iBooks are quite respectable machines.

    Anybody else see the logic of transitioning the consumer desktop and pro laptop first, rather than starting with the consumer desktop and laptop, or the pro desktop and laptop, or the pro desktop and consumer laptop, or some other combination?

    Sure, once you realize that they're offering these new machines in addition to all the old ones.

    Cheers,

    b&

  • by cmacb (547347) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:38PM (#14438760) Homepage Journal
    "Mobile users will love the new power adapter featuring the MagSafe Connector -- a magnetic DC plug that both ensures a tight connection and enables a clean break from the power port when there is undue tension. It prevents the MacBook Pro from being pulled off of a desk when the cord is accidentally tripped over, and it protects the power cord from wear and tear."

    Nobody but a careless klutz would ever trip on their power cord and pull the laptop off a desk. Would they?

    *whistles as I rock on my heels*

    Well, this got my attention. Four times faster?! How can that be? Ohhhh a dual processor and double the clock speed. Well there goes the Apple arguments that clock speed doesn't matter.

    But I have to admit they got the price right (i.e. no increase over existing models). Or is it? I seem to remember my Powerbook (which works GREAT!) only started at $1500. Oh, but I got the 12 incher, which isn't available with this "new" processor. Nice trick Apple. Almost fooled me there for a bit. Even the press is saying the prices are the same, except of course, for those of us who would really rather have a smaller box.

    My plan to get more or less the same capability is to get a dual core AMD chip in a laptop (these are already available by the way). That way I can be sure it will run Linux on day one. And, of course, the AMD machines start around a grand.

    SEE!? Now the price comparisons are much easier. Why buy and Apple when I can get the same or better for less. I'm no longer confused by that old PowerPC mumbo-jumbo. Thanks Stevie!
  • Re:Indeed (Score:3, Insightful)

    by cmacb (547347) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:42PM (#14438816) Homepage Journal
    Two words:

    Duct Tape.

    (it even matches the nice metalic case).
  • by javaxman (705658) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:51PM (#14438935) Journal
    Anybody else see the logic of transitioning the consumer desktop and pro laptop first, rather than ... some other combination?

    What machines does Apple make the largest markup on ?

    Profit is the only motive that makes sense to me. Consider that Apple knows it's going to be seeing a somewhat limited supply of chips and chipsets from Intel. With that as a given, where do they want to put those chips- in low-margin designs like the Mac mini and iBook, or in higher-margin designs like the desktop and pro laptop ?

    Also, what chipset would Apple put in a lower-end machine ? I'm going to guess that due to Apple using Trusted Computing crap to keep you from building your own MacIntel and pirating OS X, they're not going to use any chipsets ( and thus chips ) that are pre-Yonah, so the low end of what they have right now is the slower 1.3-1.6Ghz Duo Core chip... too powerful and expensive for real low-margin machines, so... no low-end Mac Intels for now, and we won't see any until Intel introduces newer chips that can move in on the high end, maybe. Of course, I'm just speculating, but nothing else makes sense to me... I don't think there's a pure market-based reason for Apple to abandon the low end, I think it's just what they're able to do right now.

    Too bad, too, I think that if Apple weren't so paranoid about OS X ending up on a Dell, they'd be able to make a seriously cheap Mac mini based on a Pentium M or something...

  • Re:No modem. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jellomizer (103300) * on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:52PM (#14438946)
    Like the absence of the Floppy Disk less then a decade ago.
    Most hotels and buisnesses use WiFi 802.11b/g. If you really want the modem you get a USB one. But for most systems now it is becoming one of those unused ports. on my powerbook I used my Modem like 4 times in 4 years. Once to see if it worked, 3 Times after I moved waiting for my Cable to be hooked up. Modems are no longer as nessary as they use to be.
  • Re:MacBook Pro (Score:2, Insightful)

    by LoudMusic (199347) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:54PM (#14438986)
    We CANNOT allow "MacBook Pro" to take off. Everyone needs to keep calling them Powerbooks.

    What, are you going to gut the Intel parts and put a Power chip back in it, or just be stupid and call it a PowerBook for no damn reason?
  • Re:Low Resolution (Score:4, Insightful)

    by juuri (7678) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @02:59PM (#14439041) Homepage
    Every time an article comes up mentioning screen res someone always something along these lines. I suggest doing a google search on DPI and optimum DPI for working on computer screens. Apple chooses resolutions in a very deliberate matter based on what it is available *and* maintaining a sane DPI that is easy on the eyes for extended work.
  • by amichalo (132545) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @03:06PM (#14439141)
    Several readers have asked "Why choose the iMac and MacBook Pro (Powerbook) for Intel chips".

    I offer this analysis:

    iMac: Best selling consumer model for Apple to select because Pro Apps what are not yet ported aren't used on these systems (at least, that isn't the target market).

    MacBook Pro: in DIRE need of a refresh since the G5 could never make it into the line. Also, Pro apps are less likely to be required for a purchase decision because they are so long in the G4-tooth.

    Mac mini: As the low cost Mac, upgrading this to an Intel chipset would canibalize sales of higher end units. In addition, the smaller margins of the Mac mini would be eaten up with the redesign and more expensive (and more powerful) chips from Intel.

    PowerMacs: The Pro Apps aren't ready. Waiting allows time to announce them when the Pro Apps are available and gives Intel time to offer faster cores.

    iBooks: best selling Apple notebooks aren't hurting for more power. Their price point is right for the student/home user and with limited resources/chip allotment, this doesn't offer as compelling a need.

    Honestly, I was surprised to get two systems updated to Intel. It is a major switch for Apple and they have done an amazing job busting these two systems out in just 6 months from the announcemnet of their intentions last summer. Even vendors with massive resources due to their market share don't refresh and entire product suite overnight. Give Apple some grace. The (fill in the blank you are waiting for) is coming soon.

    I imagine that this summer we will see a "One year ago we said we were switching to Intel and today the entire product line is Intel based" announcemnet.

  • Yawn... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Savage-Rabbit (308260) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @03:11PM (#14439199)
    I dunno but for the extra ~$550, I could get a much faster laptop than the MacBook *or* I could get the Gateway and have the money in my pocket.

    Yet again somebody makes the case for buying a Kia instead of a Benz. And before anybody is tempted to start bitching about the analogy being invalid since both the Dell and the MacBook have more or less the same 'engine' please note that if the outgoing PowerBook line is anything to judge by you get a bit more than just $550 worth of Software with the MacBook. That would include both consumer software like iMovie, iDVD, (plus a whole slew of other consumer software) and a pretty sophisticated development package. Does the Dell ship with a decent Movie editor, DVD authoring software and a full featured copy of MS Visulal Studio (according to MS that will set you back $799, upgrade: $549) as well as Windows XP? Another point is that the MacBook is likely to remain the only computer on the market able to stably triple boot OS.X Windows, and Linux which for me is a major reason to buy one although personally I probably will settle for running Windows 2003 and LINUX on some Virtual PC type setup.
  • by CerebusUS (21051) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @03:15PM (#14439244)
    What it doesn't have (comparatively):

    Decent support.

    I will never, never, never buy Gateway again.

    Dell has better support, though not by much.
  • Re:The MacBook Pro (Score:3, Insightful)

    by level_headed_midwest (888889) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @03:15PM (#14439249)
    Okay, I'll play that game too.

    1. OS X is UNIX-based, so we'll install a UNIX-based OS on the Gateway instead of XP Pro. One of my favorites is SuSE, and you can download it for the cost of one DVD-R/DL or five CD-Rs.

    2. iWork '06 is not MS Office, which is also available for the Mac. That costs extra. The Gateway comes with MS Works, and that is more equivalent to iWork than MS Office is. Also, you can get Open Office, which is more than equal to Works/iWork for free.

    3. Apple either expects people to go immediately buy another matching stick of DDR2-667 or they are not too bright. The Intel 945 chipset supports dual-channel RAM, so that's why you see very few single-module setups (i.e. the 2x256 and 2x512 configurations for the DDR2-667 in the Gateway.)

    4. The hard drives are the same: 80GB, 5400rpm SATA.

    5. The Gateway has an 8x DVD burner as opposed to the Apple's 4x one. How is that upgraded? Because it loads from a slot and not a tray?

    6. You can get a faster Core Duo chip in the Gateway than you can in ANY MacBook.

    7. The Mac has a little nicer screen and a GPU that is a teeny bit better. And it has Bluetooth. You can get a $50 Bluetooth module for the Gateway if you wanted one. And webcams are pretty inexpensive too.

    So even with a camera and Bluetooh module, you'd still save about $450 over the MacBook. Face it, there's a stiff premium to run OS X and for the Apple name.

  • Re:The MacBook Pro (Score:3, Insightful)

    by hackstraw (262471) * on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @03:17PM (#14439268)
    It's pretty expensive, to tell you the truth. I ran the specs on a Gateway NX560XL that is set up very similarly to the 15.4" MacBook Pro and got a price of $1454.99.

    If price is all you care about, then go to Wal-mart or when Dell or Gateway is having a sale, buy a computer, but all of the other software you need, rinse and repeat in 2 years.

    If you want to just get a nice looking, reliable, locally serviceable, notebook and tons of useful software that will last you 4 years or so, buy an Apple notebook.

    Its up to you. If you need Linux by your side 24x7 I would go with the cheaper "PC" notebook.

    FWIW, the NX560XL has a lower res monitor if that matters to you (not me). XP Pro, which I hear is worth it over home or media (not sure personally) will cost extra or your soul. I doubt the keys are backlit, which is a very nice feature. The new MacBook has a new safety feature that basically eliminates a majority of repairs -- magnetically attached power cord. Although, I've never had an issue with the power cord thing (I'm careful), I believe it might have almost happened once or twice. You're also giving up bluetooth.

    There are tradeoffs for every action and inaction. To me, I would spend the extra $500 and get a computer with a better name and rep than a Gateway. Besides the old ones from 1997 or so at work, I don't remember the last time I've seen a Gateway.

  • Re:Low Resolution (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Jeff DeMaagd (2015) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @03:23PM (#14439354) Homepage Journal
    I don't think there is an "optimal" dpi, otherwise laser printers wouldn't be higher than displays. What you mean in view of operating systems that are very limited in scaling UI object sizes, which is, all of the current major operating systems.

    A twelve point font should be twelve point, not necessarily twelve pixels. The way it is currently handled, fonts are too small on a 100dpi screen because points are 72dpi, yet operating systems simply render them as 12 pixels high. That makes text techically too small on pretty much any current LCD screen save maybe the 19" SXGA screens.

    I want higher resolution not necessarily to show more detail or show more text or have more objects on the screen, but have smoother fonts and UI elements rather than blocky edges.
  • by PureCreditor (300490) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @03:26PM (#14439391)
    > which means that running apps under Rosetta will be like running 68000 apps on the first Powermacs

    not that slow. rosetta instantly recompiles PPC code to x86, not emulate, so the only true overhead is the compilation, which is the same overhead you get with any runtime such as Java. Also, Apple can simply improve rosetta to include compiler optimizations (well, very very low-level), the same way Transmeta can optimize their internal core to improve x86 execution, with the key distinction that while Transmeta banks its entire corporate strategy on that translation, Apple is simply adopting it as a stop-gap bridge.

    Assume Yonah is 2x-4x that of G4 on either Int or FP (let's take Steve's word for it). Take out 20% for the lack of software compiler high-level optimization, and you still beat a native G4 app by a huge margin.

    also, if i recall correctly, 68K code was *emulated* on PowerPC-based Macs, not real-time translated.
  • Re:The MacBook Pro (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Gilmoure (18428) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @03:29PM (#14439429) Journal
    Been doing that for a few years now. Always been cheaper to run Winders. Just not as fun.
  • by mblase (200735) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @03:35PM (#14439495)
    MACBOOKPRO! ~ PC OR KABOOM!

    Rico... enough with the dynamite already.
  • Re:Don't like it (Score:3, Insightful)

    by David Rolfe (38) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @03:36PM (#14439511) Homepage Journal
    Let's check a Dell Inspiron 6000. Base price is 799$, comes with a 1.86GHz pentium M. Bluetooth is a 39$ option. A 7200 RPM drive is a 150$ option. Big total? 990$.

    Wait... is that Dell a dual pentium M?

    Does it have a built in camera? Backlit keyboard? I'm too lazy to look up Dell's site but the whole assertion just seems false on its face.

    I'm not saying that's an argument for the cost of the 17" MacBook, but c'mon. Different feature sets cost different amounts. Pay what you can afford. Pay for what you want. I just don't see where (not necessarily you) people come off with this incessant 'omg, it's just sooo expensive, just buy a Dell'.

    Everyone knows that if price is your only concern you shop at Dell. Dell has run just about everyone into the ground competing on price. They've won that battle.
  • Re:Don't like it (Score:3, Insightful)

    by CerebusUS (21051) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @03:36PM (#14439514)
    A little shy of the 2500$ for the 1.83GHz MacBook Pro, kid.

    Pretty far shy of the Core Duo performance, too, though, isn't it?
  • Re:Windows? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by CerebusUS (21051) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @03:39PM (#14439540)
    Running MS Windows on a MacBook Pro is like letting a retarded kid drive a Ferrari.

    Yeah, but at least the retarded kid gets to play F.E.A.R. and Warhammer 40,000:Dawn of War.

    While driving the Ferrari.

    Or does the metaphor break down at that point?
  • Re:Indeed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by flosofl (626809) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @03:41PM (#14439553) Homepage
    You've read 1984, haven't you? Those weren't TVs, they were computers.

    Yes, because as everyone knows the Mac has so saturated the market to be near ubiquitous.
  • by Achoi77 (669484) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @03:41PM (#14439556)
    I mean no disrespect, but if you are doing any video editing and post-production work on an apple platform machine, why aren't you doing it on a powermac? Price is obviously not the issue. Neither is portability. Because if you really needed to max out the throughput, you would need to use a raided setup, as single disk portable drives can't even use all 400Mb/s (or can they? it's been a while for me..) Do you have your portable HD plugged in?

    Just curious why the absence of firewire 800 is such an issue.

  • by ashpool7 (18172) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @03:41PM (#14439559) Homepage Journal
    .. this nickel and dime crap.

    * USB robs CPU cycles (yes, I want all of them)
    * USB does not chain
    * You don't connect DV devices over USB
    * USB on-the-go does not bring it to feature parity with FireWire
    * USB has nothing on FireWire in terms of bandwidth

    I don't buy Macs because they are missing advanced technology. I buy them because they have it by *default*. I get the latest USB and Bluetooth standards. If I am paying $3,000 for a high-end laptop it better damn well have the latest and greatest version of FireWire that cost them $2 to put in.
  • This is a horrible mistake that apple also made on the mini. Then they seemingly wonder why no one is using 800. Know why fw800 isn't taking off? They don't even use it themselves! Apple is so lame sometimes it's hard to imagine how it can happen.
  • Re:The MacBook Pro (Score:4, Insightful)

    by lost_n_confused (655941) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @03:44PM (#14439598)
    And if I bolt a snow plow on a Yugo I have a truck. Bolting garbage on the outside of something is not as clean or appealing as having it built in. Having a Bluetooth dongle and a cam with a cable is not the same thing as built in.

    By the way loading of a free *nix is not the same thing as a OS that is supported by a company. So if you have a problem with your install who are you going to call for free support? Go ahead and load iTunes and MS Office on your version of *nix and make sure that you have that special MS support number for Office versions running on *nix.

    Why are you bothering with using a Gateway computer you can buy barebones laptops and build your own. Hey you can save even more buying an LCD panel and duct taping a small computer to the back of it.

    Why don't you compare similar items. An OS with telephone support, an Office package with phone support, built in features that actually work rather then bolt on items that may or may not work, and when you buy your bolt on crap don't go for the lowest price bargain bin trash go with a name brand item.

    I am all for OSS but you might as well say the Gateway is a rip off since includes software. You and I might enjoy playing with computers but 99% of computer users are just that users. Any version of *nix is not as good for the average user because of the lack of a support structure.

    If I asked my wife to compile something so she can install a program she needs to run she would tell me to kiss her ass as would 99% of the computer users out there. Talk to someone at Best Buy and ask them how many people come in looking to buy a new computer because their old one is full of spyware and they would rather buy a new one then redo the old one. The Gateway and the MacBook are both directed at those users and the MacBook just happens to do the job better. The right tool for the right job I always say.
  • Re:Don't like it (Score:3, Insightful)

    by treke (62626) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @03:47PM (#14439621)
    I have one of those Inspiron 6000s. It's a great machine that does exactly what I want it to do and was fairly inexpensive. Before I picked up the Inspiron, I was using a Powerbook that I had from work that would have been about the equivalent to the Inspiron. Both machines performed well, but the Powerbook was a bit more comfortable to use due to size and build quality. The Dell is roughly twice as thick as the Powerbook and feels signficantly heavier. It doesnt feel quite as well built either. While it doesn't feel fragile, there are parts that don't seem as sturdy as they could be. Part of that extra 1500 bucks is name, but some of it does go towards a better machine.

    I'm in no hurry for a new laptop at this point, but if the Intel based MacBooks feel like the older Powerbooks I might go that route for the next laptop I buy.
  • Re:Low Resolution (Score:3, Insightful)

    by grimJester (890090) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @03:49PM (#14439636)
    Try this: Hold up your hand in front of your face. Too many DPI to look good?

    DPI can only be too high if you have text and icons fixed to a given amount of dots.
  • by jacksonj04 (800021) <nick@nickjackson.me> on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @03:50PM (#14439653) Homepage
    You mean along with the acceleration sensor, slimmer case, superior OS, sensible power cord that the Travelmate has?

    Not to mention you don't pay entirely for the components, you pay a lot for the fact the bloody thing just works in harmony with most other things.
  • by gentlemen_loser (817960) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @03:57PM (#14439721) Homepage
    Why? I mean really. Why in the name of all that is holy would ANYONE want to put Windows on a Mac?

    I switched FROM Linux (which I was fairly happy with as a longtime user) to OS X about 6 months ago. Comming from Linux - I actually GAINED games that I can play. That being said - around 1995 I switched from Windows to Linux. I just learned to live without Windows specific software. It really does not take much. What gaming I could not do with Linux I substituted with a console. I can see why some people would want to dual boot Linux (I still feel that open source has great merit and the urge to tinker is hard to overcome), but Windows?

    To put it another way - WHY would you go out and buy yourself a Mercedes, drive it home happily, then promptly put a nice set of square wheels on it?!?

    There is just SOO much crap in the way of viruses and MBR issues that you'd be creating for yourself that would ruin the reason you own a Mac. Why do that to yourself?
  • Re:Heh (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Golias (176380) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @04:08PM (#14439820)
    So much for the bogus 42" and 50" media center plasmas.

    The Rumors sites, such as ThinkSecret and MacOSRumors.com, were almost universally wrong this time around.

    No new iBook. No Intel mini. No plasma TV's. No "media center" mini. No movie streaming on demand (that was Cringely's guess). None of it.

    As of this keynote, Intel chips are going into the iMac and the replacement for the Powerbook... just about the only systems which NOBODY predicted upgrades for.

    Looks like Apple managed to plug up the leaks from last year.
  • Re:Chip Speed (Score:3, Insightful)

    by 93 Escort Wagon (326346) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @04:11PM (#14439849)
    "Did you post anonymously because you knew that was just a stupid question, or are you just now figuring this out?

    "Keep it up, genius. ;-)"


    You know, it was such a good, informative answer - why'd you decide to be an ass about it?

  • by watsondk (233901) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @04:24PM (#14439973) Homepage
    as a long time Mac user, the transition to Intel CPU is not something I have been looking forward to. But now I find the following little gem on the apple site

    "Most existing applications will continue to run, thanks to Rosetta. Pro applications from Apple -- including Final Cut Pro, Motion, Soundtrack Pro, DVD Studio Pro, Aperture, Logic Pro, Logic Express, and Final Cut Express -- are not supported by Rosetta. For these applications, you can upgrade to the Universal version for minimal cost (see "Apple Applications" to right). Third-party applications that require precision real-time playback may perform better with a Universal version."

    if I am reading this right, apple is saying "go buy our new intel macs, and oh, BTW, our own pro apps require $$$ updates, and other apps may not work"

    well, why would I go do this, get a new mac with its intel CPU, then have to pay more $$$$ to make apples own apps run on it

    and yes I am a user of the pro apps, plus all sorts of other apps which I have no idea are going to work at all, let alone as well as they currently do on my PPC boxes

    another little gem from the same page on apples site http://www.apple.com/rosetta/ [apple.com]

    "Rosetta dynamically translates most of your PowerPC-based application to work with your Intel-based Mac. "

    note the "most" comment in this one, a real case of butt covering if ever I saw one

    now all we need is for the shipping version x86 OSX to be hacked to run on non-apple hardware (if its not already been done), and its the beginning of the end for apple, then comes the very likely "windoze for mac" from the beast, which will reduce apple to iPods, and little else

    think about it, why would anyone buy apples hardware when they can run the same software on something much faster, for less $$$

  • Re:I Call BS (Score:3, Insightful)

    by NetFu (155538) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @04:39PM (#14440150) Homepage Journal
    You're right, the Gateway has the dual core CPU -- I couldn't find another laptop in production with this CPU, and even recent reviews were on pre-production laptops.

    Anyway, when I customize the Gateway with Windows XP Pro (+$100), 1 512mb memory module (+$40), a 1400x1050 display matching the MacBook (+$100), an 80gb HD (+$35), and Bluetooth (+$50), the price I end up with is $1625 before shipping and handling (correct me if I'm wrong, but Gateway is mail order only).

    That's not including the software bundle that comes with the MacBook, but I'm assuming you already have all the Windows software that does photo, movie, DVD, and website editing? If you don't, that extra cost will easily close the gap between the Gateway and Apple laptops.

    Even not considering that, like others have said, I don't think you can compare the quality of a Gateway laptop to the quality of an Apple laptop. And, I own Apple, Gateway, and eMachines hardware (eMachines acquired Gateway from the inside out). I love my AMD64 eMachines laptop, but comparing it's sturdiness and quality to my 15" PowerBook is a joke.
  • by shmlco (594907) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @04:41PM (#14440170) Homepage
    The security cable "port" is still in the middle of the right hand side though, a bad design feature I've commented on before. As is, the cable runs backwards along the right side, blocking all the other ports there. Better placement would be back near the power port, as a notebook locked down at a desk would also tend to be plugged in...
  • Re:The MacBook Pro (Score:3, Insightful)

    by kanweg (771128) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @04:41PM (#14440173)
    I use a PowerBook to earn my living (have a small company. No not in the creative sector. Who told people that Macs are only used there?). $450 is VERY easy to earn back over a couple of years, eh months. Things like Spotlight which make that I don't have t spend time searching for files, and not having to worry about virusses (which advantage may be lost on Intel-based Macs in the near future) make this saving very real. And even if that weren't all there: Working with a nice looking machine, a nice OS, nice apps etc. help to enjoy work. Worth less than a buck a day? Definitely.

    Bert
  • Re:The MacBook Pro (Score:2, Insightful)

    by JonJ (907502) <jon.jahren@gmail.com> on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @05:07PM (#14440496)
    By the way loading of a free *nix is not the same thing as a OS that is supported by a company.

    You're saying that OSX comes with free telephone support? Besides, SUSE is supported by Novell, or are they not a company?
    Why don't you compare similar items. An OS with telephone support, an Office package with phone support, built in features that actually work rather then bolt on items that may or may not work, and when you buy your bolt on crap don't go for the lowest price bargain bin trash go with a name brand item.

    He's not downloading bits and pieces, he's downloading a complete Linux-distribution, supported by a company, that has telehpone support. Since they support their entire operating system I suspect they support OpenOffice as well.
    If I asked my wife to compile something so she can install a program she needs to run she would tell me to kiss her ass as would 99% of the computer users out there.
    It's very obvious that Mac-fanatics and people that would very much like to kiss Steve Jobs' ass is not very enlightened. Ever heard of YaST? YOU? .deb, .rpm? People aren't spending their entire time compiling anymore. Moron.
  • by Reaperducer (871695) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @05:16PM (#14440602)
    I mean no disrespect, but if you are doing any video editing and post-production work on an apple platform machine, why aren't you doing it on a powermac?

    Because you can't bring a Powermac into a war zone. Or a flood. Or any kind of disaster. Or anywhere where there isn't stable power. I know people who specialize in disaster footage. They get in, shoot it, run back to their camp/Explorer/hotel and edit, and squirt it out to their clients in a matter of two or three hours. (As a side note, they told me that it was pretty strange that in southern Mississippi during Katrina Sprint's cell phone service went down for days in their area, but data stayed up. Go figure.)

    That's one application. There's probably others.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @06:15PM (#14441279)
    I'm sure whan Apple designed this, they didn't say "Who is our primary market? I know, people who shoot disaster footage".

    People in that particular niche can pay for a Firewire 800 card to go in the expansion slot without much trouble.
  • by hobbit (5915) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @06:39PM (#14441499)
    Can somebody please explain to me why the Apple Remote still uses IR and not Bluetooth?

    I feel sure that there must be some reason, even if it isn't a very good one. But I can't think of a thing.

  • Re:The MacBook Pro (Score:2, Insightful)

    by haakondahl (893488) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @06:44PM (#14441548)
    Lapintosh might have worked for the PB 100. The concept is a little old now.
    I don't care much for "MacBook" myself, although I hope the early posters are right, and it builds some "Scottish Laptop" vibe. That will go over well with some of their core constituents. Sigh. For that matter so would, say, "Gemini", which also refers to the Core Duo (Sigh!). Or they could have gone a bit retro with the twin theme:
    ][Book = "twinbook", or Book][ = "Book Two".
    They could even pre-empt the Timbuktu ref with their own ads.
    Apple must have cringed when they heard Intel was calling the chip "Duo" anything, with the PB 5xx series lurking back there.
  • by colmore (56499) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @07:11PM (#14441748) Journal
    Doubtful.

    The new chips will be out in more machines than just Apple. Why does Apple not release the mini on lower spec processors? Well first off, just because they didn't announce it the *day* they revealed their first Intel machines, doesn't mean it isn't going to happen. Second off, they aren't in the bottom-end business in general. The mini is a transition machine for geeks. It's meant to make OS X appeal to the homebrew crowd, who don't account for many sales, but do generate a lot of buzz. It's an important product, but it's not their top priority. Secondly, the mini is a little engineering feat. There is a very much non-zero cost in assembling a new one and testing it. Their first two machines seem to address the biggest hole in their product line (badly lagging top-end laptop) and the most friendly product for the early adopter crowd (medium cost & big cool factor iMac)

    Apple also wants to avoid getting mired in the jargon and infinitely fractured product lines of the PC world. I imagine their negotiations with Intel are a big reason that Yonah isn't being called Pentium-Y etc. I doubt they will ever have more than two processor families going in their active line of computers (2 laptops, 2 desktops + eMac, mini, server)

    Thinking that Apple is overly concerned about piracy ignores the company's history of not using any kind of restriction or guard against software copying. Most apple applications STILL can be copied from one computer on a network to another, simply by dragging the application icon. No apple product has ever had a CD Key or anything similar. They're aware of their market and demographics. They sell to professionals and high-end users who don't mind buying software. It's the same reason they can drop support for old OS X releases the moment the new one comes out. Their market doesn't mind paying, and it enables them to push new technologies with a much greater ease than if they had to maintain the roughly 5-year backwards compatibility that Microsoft does. The first time Apple ever had ANY copy control on anything they've done is when they started getting in bed with the media industry. That just goes with that territory, but their power over Apple isn't so great as to affect the design of their computing systems, otherwise you'd have seen much more significant changes to the way things like Appletalk and Safari handle files by now.

    Likewise, try to imagine the type of person that would be downloading a torrent of OS X, burning it to a CD, and installing on unsupported and undocumented hardware. That person is not a potential apple customer. They're clearly not willing to fork over the Apple premium (yes it does exist, Apple has nothing in competition with $300 and $400 desktop with monitor and $600 laptops, even though those give performance roughly equivalent -- where it matters to that market anyway -- to the lowest end ibook and the emac and mini) so why should Apple care? Their tech support will hang up as soon as the "customer" says they are on non-apple hardware, it's only a small core of nerds looking to brag about accomplishing something illicit that will be doing this. Mom, Joe Dormroom, Suzy Designer, and Vic Corporate would never bother.

    Apple's entire market strategy is about maintaining a large niche with heavy profit margins. I really doubt they want to dominate the PC world. If Apple had Microsoft's market share, they'd have to do things very differently (not for the least of reasons that many of their practices such as hardware exclusivity and software bundling would make Microsoft look angelic in comparason if OS X were the "default" operating system of the masses.

    If they *are* making significant product design decisions based on the fear of OS X getting onto some Dell somewhere, then they're fools.
  • Re:The MacBook Pro (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @07:42PM (#14441970)
    You forgot the SDK/IDE that comes with the Mac. That doesn't come with a Gateway. Probably the cheapest SDK/IDE with which you could build your own sellable MS Windows product would start at about $600.00.
  • by topham (32406) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @08:09PM (#14442171) Homepage
    Using Rosetta meany applications compiled for PPC can run.

    There is an option to compile for Intel or PPC when developing using X-Code and X-Code uses gcc as a compiler.

    Most applications should be fine, more exotic utilities will probably need recompiles, and if they are still being developed it should be a small amount of work for the developer; especially if they arleady make the tool available cross platform.
  • by Hiro Antagonist (310179) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @08:16PM (#14442213) Journal
    I'm surprised they and others* hadn't done this sooner; I've had such a power connector on a deep fryer for years. But it never occurred to me that laptops would be a great application for the idea.

    Well, they've switched to Intel, so it's pretty obvious that Mac would choose to use other aspects of deep-fryer technology.

    (Rimshot!)
  • by inio (26835) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @08:25PM (#14442266) Homepage
    My guess:

    As of MWSF 2007, the product lineup will be:

    Mac Pro - MacBook Pro
    Mac Mini - MacBook Mini (10" screen)
    iMac - iMacBook
    possible: MacServe
  • by hobbit (5915) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @08:43PM (#14442399)
    No pairing your remote with your computer (something the technical set can do easily, but not necessarily ma and pa)
    Yet they are foisting wireless keyboards and mice on Ma and Pa?
    and even at large volumes Bluetooth chips are still quite a bit more expensive than plain ol' IR.
    What, $2? $5? When did Apple become Dell / Wal-Mart?
    If it ain't broke...
    If your line of sight is broken, so is your control. But I did just think of a good reason: battery life.
  • Re:The MacBook Pro (Score:3, Insightful)

    by lost_n_confused (655941) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @10:38PM (#14443046)
    I am so glad the Novell has decided to give away free telephone support for a free product. No wonder they are on the verge of collapse if they are giving you free software and then letting you talk to a person on the phone for support. Wait thats not right if YOU PAY Novell then you get phone support. Being a dumb ass is why you equate a free product with a paid for support product.

    I hope to God you don't work in IT and actually are allowed to make architecture decisions. Hey lets use SUSE cuz it is free and Novell supports it. Wrong blowzo Novell will only support it if you PAY them. Please show me all of the phone numbers for all of the free distributions so I can give them to people when they have a problem.

    Find me 1 single company or person that gives free phone support for any free version of *nix. You use something free to make your point and then when your balls are nailed to the door you resort to name calling and see see Novell supports it. So you need to add in the cost of a support contract for a single user copy of SUSE from Novell. What is the cost of that? The online support for *nix is terrible for the non-technical user. The *nix forums are notorious for flaming newbies with what they consider a trivial problem that anyone worthy of using *nix should know.

    Oh by the way how does a person that has one computer get on the internet to see how to fix his networking problem that won't let him on the internet. If Yast, rpm, and .deb are so wonderful then why is the in internet full of 1000's of questions about installation issues? The people that put the packages together do a fine job but since they aren't being paid they don't fix all problems because they don't have the resources.

    You know it is better to be a moron then a fuckhead with a brain the size of his penis like you. As for enlightenment the closest you get to being enlightened is when you pull your head out of your ass once a year to see if winter is over.
  • by JeffTL (667728) on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @11:08PM (#14443194)
    The Powerbook name had nothing to do with PowerPC (early models were 68K) -- but after well over a decade, it's easily tired.
  • by 2nd Post! (213333) <gundbear@pacbe l l .net> on Tuesday January 10, 2006 @11:28PM (#14443275) Homepage
    You forgot something. The MacBook is 1" and 5.6lb, your Gateway is 1.3" and 6.3lb. It' also missing a backlit keyboard, magnetic power plug, magnetic screen latch, no dual link DVI (goodbye 30" LCD), lower resolution (1280x800), the integrated video card, the increased build quality, and integrated Intel graphics.

    Then there is the software: iLife, OS X, iChat, etc.

    Is that worth $450? For some people, definitely.
  • Re:The MacBook Pro (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 11, 2006 @12:34AM (#14443573)
    "OS X is UNIX-based, so we'll install a UNIX-based OS on the Gateway instead of XP Pro. One of my favorites is SuSE,"

    yeah, install SuSe on the thing! That's the ticket and it makes them so equivalent right?

    Oh yeah, forgot, Final Cut won't run on SuSE. OOOPS!
    Oh yeah, forgot, Photoshop won't run on SuSE. OOOPS!
    Oh yeah, forgot, Illustrator won't run on SuSE. OOOPS!
    Oh yeah, forgot, After Effects won't run on SuSE. OOOPS!
    Oh yeah, forgot, NuEndo won't run on SuSE. OOOPS!
    Oh yeah, forgot, Reason won't run on SuSE. OOOPS!

    So what the hell am I gonna do? Run a bunch of network apps and say I am cool? I use Linux at work. No thanks. I'd use *nix as a file/web/ftp/etc server, but that's about it. Everything that *I* want to do, you can't do on SuSE. You can do it on Windows (well, except Final Cut - so I have Premiere Pro or Avid), and you can do it on OSX. And PLEASE don't anyone give me that "You can run GIMP, it's just as good as Photoshop" line! That is soooo NOT true. I mean maybe it is if you are doing simple photo editing, or prepping stuff for display on a web page, but GIMP does != Photoshop, sorry. Neither do the free NLEs or Audio Editing Apps. Trust me. Use them as a professional and you'll see the difference. There are 1 or two exceptions for Effects compositing & other software for Linux that are great, but those are NOT free apps.

    You're OS analogy is frought with holes, and that's only step #1

    Oh yeah, you PAY for XP when you buy a laptop, so you are installing SuSE and NOT saving any money. One could even say that since you are paying for XP in the price, and wiping it and installing SuSE, you are in a sense paying for SuSE.

    Then there's that whole support issue...

    If I am going to run SuSE on a laptop, I'm getting a cheap $500 or less laptop for it. Why the hell would I want to install SuSE on a dual core laptop? So I can say "Man, I have the FASTEST ftp server around!" :-)

    SuSE & other flavors of *nix are great for some things, but for me it's either Windows or the Mac "flavor" of BSD. If I am going to do more basic stuff like get email, surf the web, IM people and use "Office" apps and I want to use any *nix other than OSX I'll get a cheapy laptop. A dual-core like this is just overkill.

    Of course, I could be wrong (but in this case I kinda doubt it).
  • Re:Heh (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Golias (176380) on Wednesday January 11, 2006 @02:11AM (#14443902)
    Since Mac Rumors runs just about every whisper of every last thing that might happen, they can claim to have "predicted" it no matter what happens.

    Just five days ago, they were claiming Apple was about to announce 42" and 50" plasma screens for use with "Viiv" at the Keynote.

    That's about as valid as the half-dozen or so Slashbots who replied to my post by saying "I said it would probably happen." Sure, out of the thousands of people who like to speculate on Apple's next move, somebody's gotta win the lottery.

    My question to all of you who are so proudly claiming to have called it correctly is, how much did you wager on that betting site that Slashdot was telling us about last week? You'd be a rich man today if you actually "predicted" it and had the confidence to put a little money down on it.

Building translators is good clean fun. -- T. Cheatham

Working...