[bangraman]

That's all very well, but why cripple a Macbook with Windows? If you're working on a file-sharing basis and don't need binary compatibility, there's no point putting Windows on a MacBook/Pro. It's like putting giant training wheels onto a $3000 racing bicycle. I'm totally dependent on MS environment beyond my desktop yet I can work in Mac OS 100% of the time. I have Entourage, Excel and Word which boots up not significantly slower than on a Windows machine (as well as Pages and Keynote) and Citrix presentation server client.

 

[steel102]

i ordered a 2ghz macbook last week and should be getting it tomorrow. i'm just praying that it doesn't have any heat/moo/discoloration issues

 

[AlanY]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bangraman I have Entourage, Excel and Word which boots up not significantly slower than on a Windows machine (as well as Pages and Keynote) and Citrix presentation server client.

You kind of answered your own question there. If you didn't need access to Windows-only apps, if only occasionally, you wouldn't have a need for Citrix Client. A lot of home users don't have (or no longer want, in my case) a separate Windows server hidden in a closet to remote login into for those occasional times when you might like to use Windows-only software. Parallels solves this problem nicely and elegantly.

It's not that there is a lack of Mac software. In my case, a number of the apps I use (especially OmniOutliner) have no good Windows equivalent. But there are a few reasons to keep Windows available. For instance, there is still no personal finance software for Macs equivalent to Quicken for Windows or MS Money. Quicken for Mac is good, but it doesn't support all the features of the Windows version yet. MoneyDance and iBank are both fairly good too and improving rapidly, but still are not quite to the level of the Windows heavy hitters. (On the plus side however, none of these apps, even Quicken for Mac, is infested with the same kind of advertising the Windows versions have.) Incidentally, the Unix program Gnucash also runs great on Macs, but it's the classic example of bad Unix software, terrible UI, overkill for simple money management and checkbook balancing (everything uses double-entry bookkeeping) but with major omissions for more serious finances (e.g. no capital gains calculations in the last stable version... it all has to be done by hand using a spreadsheet or a pad of paper).

 

[patricklang]

40% Office and 10% Photoshop? If I were you, I would either:
- Wait for native Intel versions of your apps (2007?)
- Buy a refurb G4 if you can't wait

Otherwise 50% of the time you'll be wishing you were on a G4/G5. Rosetta is a memory hog, running multiple applications under rosetta will feel sluggish without > 1 gig ram. Design/graphics apps? Your old G4 will probably be faster at Photoshop. Both Microsoft and Adobe have stated there will not be universal binary versions of current products, you'll have to wait and buy the next releases.

As for Vista - the MacBook has only 64mb shared memory with the GMA950 integrated. You won't get full visual effects without 128+.

Also, with the MacBook, you miss out on ExpressCard for expandability.

 

[bangraman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlanY You kind of answered your own question there. If you didn't need access to Windows-only apps, if only occasionally, you wouldn't have a need for Citrix Client. A lot of home users don't have (or no longer want, in my case) a separate Windows server hidden in a closet to remote login into for those occasional times when you might like to use Windows-only software. Parallels solves this problem nicely and elegantly. It's not that there is a lack of Mac software. In my case, a number of the apps I use (especially OmniOutliner) have no good Windows equivalent. But there are a few reasons to keep Windows available. For instance, there is still no personal finance software for Macs equivalent to Quicken for Windows or MS Money. Quicken for Mac is good, but it doesn't support all the features of the Windows version yet. MoneyDance and iBank are both fairly good too and improving rapidly, but still are not quite to the level of the Windows heavy hitters. (On the plus side however, none of these apps, even Quicken for Mac, is infested with the same kind of advertising the Windows versions have.) Incidentally, the Unix program Gnucash also runs great on Macs, but it's the classic example of bad Unix software, terrible UI, overkill for simple money management and checkbook balancing (everything uses double-entry bookkeeping) but with major omissions for more serious finances (e.g. no capital gains calculations in the last stable version... it all has to be done by hand using a spreadsheet or a pad of paper).

My use for the presentation server client is simply because all my work files is kept in a Windows cluster with access limited to via CPS, and I use some professional, non-mainstream software which is Windows-only. I have a separate Exchange server in my colo rack for my regular emails, which is what Entourage connects to. If you don't do things like me it's even simpler on the Mac. In the case of the OP, it doesn't seem as though he will be doing anything out of the mainstream or checkbook balancing (something lacking on the Mac apparently, not that I know as I don't use personal finance software).

 

[AlanY]

Quote:

Originally Posted by patricklang As for Vista - the MacBook has only 64mb shared memory with the GMA950 integrated. You won't get full visual effects without 128+.

This is not true. The amount of RAM devoted to the the GMA950 is controlled by the operating system. If you have enough RAM, OS X devotes 256MB to the GMA950. Using the current Boot Camp drivers, the MacBooks fully meet all the requirements for Vista Aero/Glass, both in the Vista compatibility tool and in actual use with the current Vista beta.

 

[firefox360]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlanY This is not true. The amount of RAM devoted to the the GMA950 is controlled by the operating system. If you have enough RAM, OS X devotes 256MB to the GMA950. Using the current Boot Camp drivers, the MacBooks fully meet all the requirements for Vista Aero/Glass, both in the Vista compatibility tool and in actual use with the current Vista beta.

Are you sure thats true? Where'd you read that?

If it is indeed true, then that would place the MacBook pretty much up with the MacBook Pro, considering the performance of the GMA950 is not too shabby, especially if you only play games a bit.

 

[saint.panda]

Finally got to test the laptops at the local Mac center and quite liked the new Mac Books non-pro. The heat, keyboard type and lack of illumination aren't great but I think I can live with these issues.

Just a few questions for MacBook owners before I pull the trigger.

1. How often does the glossy screen become a nuisance?
2. Any other major concerns that you have encountered over time?
3. Is a smaller Macbook Pro (12'' or 13'') to be expected?

Thanks again.

 

[esco]

Hey, I've been a macbook owner since they came out and there's only 1 thing that bother me about it (which is outweighed by everything I LOVE about it

)

My macbook moo's...it's the fan on the processor that starts up and stops at regular intervals, making it sound like a mooing cow. They fixed the problem with the Macbook Pro's that moo'ed w/ a firmware update, so hopefully they'll do it for the Macbook soon. Right now, my macbook's not mooing. It only happens sometimes. Oh, and about the screen, i mostly use my macbook inside, so i never get any glare w/ my macbook. Even in well lit rooms it's fine. Outside isn't that bad, but you just need to position your screen well when you do so.

 

[mbd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by saint.panda Finally got to test the laptops at the local Mac center and quite liked the new Mac Books non-pro. The heat, keyboard type and lack of illumination aren't great but I think I can live with these issues. Just a few questions for MacBook owners before I pull the trigger. 1. How often does the glossy screen become a nuisance? 2. Any other major concerns that you have encountered over time? 3. Is a smaller Macbook Pro (12'' or 13'') to be expected? Thanks again.

Hiya,

Didn't see your original post, but I agree with most that the macbook over the macbook pro sounds best for your described needs. The only thing I'd suggest you consider is to look at maxing the RAM to 2gb - RAM is going to be your friend when running OSX, and especially if you want to play with virtualisation software like Parallels, or doing anything graphically. benchmarks have shown that the graphics capabilities of the macbook can be half the speed they otherwise would be if the machine doesnt have the RAM to provide all that's being asked for.

I go through macs like some people here go through headphone equipment - I have similar requirements to you and had the same choice to make recently. I chose the macbook over the pro as while a separate GPU would have been preferable, it really wasnt important to my needs. (I do like to play games on occasion, but didnt think it was worth the price of 2-3 gaming consoles to have that ability). I didn't need expandibility of the pc-card. And at 2ghz core duo, the macbook's cpu has been benchmarked to pretty much match that of the similar speed macbook pro.

In answer to your recent questions;

1. How often does the glossy screen become a nuisance?

In two weeks, it's happened once, and 'nuisance' would be too strong a word. I've seen terrible glossy screens on pc laptops and this isn't one of them. If you have a bright light source pointing at the wrong angle, you will see it. It's only happened to me once in several different lit environments, and a slight angle adjustment of the screen fixed it immediately...

2. Any other major concerns that you have encountered over time?

No. The keyboard took getting used to compared to Apple's previous models, but it's *really* nice now. I like it better than the old ones. Less likely to make mistakes/hit two keys at the same time when touch typing....

My biggest issue so far is finding a sleeve for it immediately - I've ordered one, but am waiting. Hardly an issue though

3. Is a smaller Macbook Pro (12'' or 13'') to be expected?


I wouldn't expect one in the immediate future. There are rumours that Apple is looking at releasing some kind of ultra portable device that doesn't have a hard disk but uses NAND flash memory as its storage. There have also been rumours that the next gen of iPods will have the entire face as a touch screen LCD and a stylus. Perhaps they'll merge both into one thing, but who knows. The Macbook is still very new, and the macbook pro only six months old, so I wouldn't be expecting anything too soon. That said, very few people ever really know what Apple will do next, so if they release a 10" portable next week, don't blame me

hope this helps


[EDIT] When looking at RAM, it's worth looking into buying third party RAM that is certified to work with Apple hardware - you may find that you save enough to be able to afford a HedFive with the difference

 

[hongda]

For those looking into Macbooks, there's a new processor coming out in a few months from Intel. Codenamed Merom. Has a larger L2 cache which should help with speed. In addition early next year there's going to be a faster front side bus. Apple is rumored to be the first to get the meroms. You can do a search on google for more info.

 

[mbd]

You mean, if people wait long enough before buying a computer, something faster will be available?

 

[Wodgy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hongda For those looking into Macbooks, there's a new processor coming out in a few months from Intel. Codenamed Merom. Has a larger L2 cache which should help with speed. In addition early next year there's going to be a faster front side bus. Apple is rumored to be the first to get the meroms. You can do a search on google for more info.

This advice applies to buying any laptop or computer, not just MacBooks. There will always be something faster/better a few months away. I wouldn't worry about it. The current 2GHz Core Duo is already overkill, speed-wise, for most people. I can see waiting if you need the additional battery life Merom is supposed to provide, but really, if a person needs a machine that will run all day, the ThinkPad X60 is the best choice for that (shame it doesn't come in an even longer running Core Solo version).

I've spent a lot of time playing around with the new MacBook glossy screen and I've got to say, it's much less of an issue than I expected it to be. It's closer to semi-glossy than some of the full-on-glossy consumer PC laptops I've compared it to. I like it. Not having the diffuse surface reflections you get with a matte display seems to reduce eyestrain more than the occasional glossy reflection seems to cause problems.

 

[saint.panda]

Thanks for all the advice great again, especially mbd.

I'm most likely going to buy the white 2GHz MacBook with 512MB RAM and 60 GB HD this week. I'm also going to buy a 2GB 3rd party RAM, a 300GB external HD and perhaps a bigger 3rd party internal HD sometime later.

And thinking about it again, I doubt I'll need a 12'' MacBook Pro since the MaxBook's 13'' display is about perfect for my needs.

 

[hongda]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbd You mean, if people wait long enough before buying a computer, something faster will be available?

Hehehe, Amazing ain't it?

But this is considered a major refresh. Merom is the Core 2 Duo (god I hate that name) for laptops, as opposed to Core duos currently in laptops.


Anyways, it might also mean a price drop on core duo equipped macbooks.