Slashdot Log In
MacBook Pro Gets Santa Rosa Chipset, LED Screen
Posted by
CmdrTaco
on Wed Jun 06, 2007 08:46 AM
from the well-isn't-that-special dept.
from the well-isn't-that-special dept.
frdmfghtr writes "TechNewsWorld is reporting that Apple has updated the MacBook Pro line with the Santa Rosa chipset from Intel. In addition, Apple is also introducing mercury-free displays with some models. 'When Apple presented new editions of its MacBook line last month, the company excluded the latest Intel Centrino chips, dubbed "Santa Rosa," which had been released just days prior. The chips have found their way into Apple's new high-end MacBook Pro notebooks, which the company revealed Tuesday. Certain models use mercury-free displays, falling in line with the company's recent ecological promises.'"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
How about... (Score:5, Informative)
Also, while Apple folks and other tech-savvy folks may know the Intel-based Macs run Windows, why does the news article not even mention that? For many people even considering buying a Mac, the fact that a laptop like this can easily run Windows natively or seamlessly alongside Mac OS X with packages like Parallels Desktop [parallels.com] at least bears repeating.
Re:How about... (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:How about... (Score:5, Funny)
I can't speak for you or the grandparent post's author, but I like to leave the house occasionally. A laptop is a good decision for people who occasionally stand, walk, or otherwise engage in self-locomotion.
I try to stick to the simple things, like World of Warcraft, Guild Wars, Quake 4, etc.
All that snarkiness aside, I am really into games, so I did exactly what you said. Powerful system, peripherals, and huge monitor. It's called my Wii, PS3, and my HD television.
Parent
Re:How about... (Score:5, Funny)
So, if you like to leave the house and be outdoors, WHY ON EARTH ARE YOU TAKING YOUR GAMING LAPTOP WITH YOU? For god's sake man, unglue yourself from the machine!
Parent
Re:How about... (Score:4, Funny)
Geddit! Windows. Looking out windows. Using windows. In a MacbookPro discussion. Funny!
OK, I'm leaving now.
Parent
Re:How about... (Score:4, Funny)
*cry*
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
One of the main reasons I got a MacBook Pro vs. a MacBook was the ATI X1600. I'm not a hardcore gamer by any means, but there are times when I like to tinker with a game here and there. Sure, it isn't upgradable and will probably be obsolete in a year or two, but u
Re:How about... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:How about... (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, come on. Anyone even remotely considering buying a Mac can read all about its ability to run Windows programs on Apple's website. Given the fact that all new Macs have been able to do this for a year and a half now, it's not exactly news anymore. And it's not as if there has been a shortage of coverage of this ability, either. There's a difference between "bears repeating" and "repeating ad nauseam".
Parent
Re:How about... (Score:4, Insightful)
This is the single biggest factor in new Mac purchases at my institution, and many other settings.
Whether it comes with iDVD and GarageBand and iCal is not in the least.
And many, many people still don't fully understand that, yes, it really, really can run Windows. And yes, your Windows app will really, really work. Yes, even that one. Yes, really.
Wouldn't you agree that warrants at least a sentence alongside all the other drivel in the article?
Parent
Re:How about... (Score:5, Informative)
That is very true. People don't understand Virtualization and Confuse it with Emulation. Emulators tend to have a lot of problems with compatibiliy because anything that the programmer didn't think of will not work. Virtualization is having the program run nativly and only emulating a few Low Level calls (Memory Containment, Video, Hardware). So if it request some strange opt-code from the processor the processor will nativly handle it, as well the other OS is running so unlike Wine which translate system calls to the host OS. Virtualization handles the OS's System Calls. But historically before Mac Going Intel Everything needed to be Emulated so some stuff didn't work or work well.
As for boot camp people don't understand where the Hardware code stops and the OS begins. Some people think boot camp is Windows Running on Top of OS X (Like a single user virutalization) Leaving resources reserved for OS X to keep it alive. All boot camp does is work as a boot loader for Windows and once windows is loaded Windows has full control of your system.
Parent
Re:How about... (Score:5, Funny)
you forgot to add "...muhuhuhahahaha"
Parent
Re:How about... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes. And that's fine.
The fact that it can run Windows does not.
The fact that a *Mac* easily/natively/seamlessly runs Windows doesn't "distinguish" it from other computers, and that's exactly the point. And it does distinguish it from every other Mac for the over-two-decades before Intel-based Macs started shipping (horridly slow emulation aside, no matter how well it was done).
And as I said elsewhere, the fact that Macs can now run Windows is the single biggest reason people are buying Macs in many markets, especially education, research, and government, and there are still many people who don't understand that, Yes, Macs Really Can Run Windows.
It was at least worth a passing sentence in the article.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:How about... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:How about... (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The article does mention that.
"the notebooks come with [...] iLife '06. iLife '06 includes Apple's next-generation digital lifestyle applications: iPhoto, iMovie HD, iDVD, GarageBand and iWeb."
How come they don't mention the OS has a *nix underbelly?
Because that's not relevant to the much, much larger number and percentage of people who might have casually considered Mac OS X and Apple hardware, might not yet understand these things can easily run Windows or
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
For a moment, you made me think I was having a really good dream...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Yes, Santa Rosa is just the codename for Intel's next-generation Centrino platform: Wikipedia [wikipedia.org]
updated features (Score:4, Informative)
Re:updated features (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:updated features (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
How about color quality? (Score:5, Interesting)
As some one who's concerned with color correction, though, I wonder how accurate and vivid are the colors on these new screens. I'm not ordering one to find out.
Re:How about color quality? (Score:4, Informative)
However, from what I understand, the iPod screens have been LED based for some time; while I don't have one myself, from what I've seen the colors are very nice on them.
Take that as you will 8-)
Cheers
Parent
Re:How about color quality? (Score:4, Interesting)
Color Guru Andrew Rodney [digitaldog.net] has said in several online fora that the wider gamut of LED-illuminated monitors is not necessarily a good thing. A wider gamut does not necesarily mean a larger gamut.
If that doesn't make intuitive sense to you, think about this example: You place 5 stones in a straight line on the ground at 1-foot intervals. Now pick them up and place the same 5 stones at 2-foot intervals. You've created a wider figure, but have not increased the number of stones - the figure still has the same number of intervals.
If each of the stones in the above example represents a shade of color, then simply widening the gamut without providing additional color resolution - more than eight bits per color channel, for example - will not display additional color information, and in fact will worsen the display's performance at reproducing the smaller gamut of the sRGB colorspace (the assumed colorspace for Windows machines and most digital cameras).
If this is yet-another 6-bit display, this situation will be even worse
I'm definitely the target buyer for this machine, but am cautiously sitting on my hands, awaiting word from the color-management community on how it fares, and to see if Apple has finally fixed the battery and other problems that have dogged the MacBook Pro line.
Parent
Re:How about color quality? (Score:5, Informative)
The LEDs do just provide the backlight.
The color spectrum that a given LED provides will necessarily be different than the spectrum that CCF backlights generate, and different from the spectra that the various CRT monitor phosphors generate.
If a given portion of the spectrum is not present in the "white light" (using that term very loosely here) backlight, no amount of filtering by the LCD screen overlay can put it back. If this is not intuitive, imagine trying to create blue using only a pure-red LED backlight. (You can't do it - the backlight must have at least some blue).
So if, for example, the LED backlight has more green and red light available in its "white light" spectrum than a CCF backlight has, the LCD overlay so-illuminated can produce yellow tones (since red and green are the constituent primaries that make yellow) that a LCD illuminated with a CCF cannot. That gives the LED-illuminated LCD a wider gamut.
However, if both the LED-illuminated and the CCF-illuminated LCD overlays only filter light at a resolution of 8 bits per channel, they will both be able to display the same amount of information about color, but because the gamut of one is different from the gamut of the other, in many cases they will not be able to display the same colors.
The "6-bit" comment in my earlier post refers to the fact that Apple has been shipping 6-bit displays on its Powerbooks and MacBook pros for a while. I believe there has been a /. post on this situation.
If a manufacturer provides more bit depth (more than 8 bits per channel, f.e.) the LCD overlay will be able to filter the available light more finely than 8- or 6-bit displays can do. In general, an 8-bit display should in fact have a larger (but not necessarily wider) gamut than a 6-bit. A 10-, 12-, or (allow me to dream here) 16-bit-per-channel display would have still larger (but again, not necessarily wider).
In an LCD display the spectrum of the backlight will determine how wide the gamut can be at its absolute maximum - if a color is not present in that spectrum, it cannot be filtered into existance by the LCD overlay. By the same token, the bit-depth-per-channel of the LCD overlay will determine how many individual color tones are in that gamut.
In reality, it's a lot more complicated than this, but this is the gist of it.
Parent
Re:How about color quality? (Score:4, Insightful)
They will likely be, but not "necessarily" be. There's no requirement that makes it "necessary". CRTs work much different and shouldn't be included in the discussion.
"If a given portion of the spectrum is not present in the "white light" (using that term very loosely here) backlight, no amount of filtering by the LCD screen overlay can put it back. If this is not intuitive, imagine trying to create blue using only a pure-red LED backlight. (You can't do it - the backlight must have at least some blue)."
Yes, but LCD displays work using color filters and the "white light" does not need to have a particularly full spectrum. It only needs to offer what the filters wish to pass.
"So if, for example, the LED backlight has more green and red light available in its "white light" spectrum than a CCF backlight has, the LCD overlay so-illuminated can produce yellow tones (since red and green are the constituent primaries that make yellow) that a LCD illuminated with a CCF cannot. That gives the LED-illuminated LCD a wider gamut."
What do you mean by "more green and red"? If it has simply "more" then you are wrong. The gamut will be the same but the brightness will be different. In order for there to be differences in possible yellow tones there needs to be qualitative differences in the green and red itself.
"However, if both the LED-illuminated and the CCF-illuminated LCD overlays only filter light at a resolution of 8 bits per channel, they will both be able to display the same amount of information about color, but because the gamut of one is different from the gamut of the other, in many cases they will not be able to display the same colors."
Who says the gamut of one is different from the other? The LCD panels may be the same thus required spectra the same and the color balance of the light sources may be the same. In that case, even though the backlights are different and have different CRIs, the result will be a matching gamut.
"In general, an 8-bit display should in fact have a larger (but not necessarily wider) gamut than a 6-bit."
The color gamut is the range of color possible to achieve. The bit depth determines the quantization within that gamut. Your use of the confusing and similar term "larger" is not helping matters any. Most people will equate "larger" and "wider" (understandably) as meaning the same thing. You should not be creating confusion in an effort to eliminate it. Having more bits does not make a gamut "larger". What it does is provide smoother tonality.
"In an LCD display the spectrum of the backlight will determine how wide the gamut can be at its absolute maximum..."
"...if a color is not present in that spectrum, it cannot be filtered into existance by the LCD overlay."
but a metamer of it can. That's how tristimulus display works!!! Whether a given spectral line exists in a backlight has no impact on whether a given color exists in the resulting gamut. If what you say were true, we wouldn't be using LED OR CCFL for backlights and CRTs wouldn't work worth a shit!
"By the same token, the bit-depth-per-channel of the LCD overlay will determine how many individual color tones are in that gamut."
Finally you got something right. Bit depth determines tonality, not gamut "largeness".
"In reality, it's a lot more complicated than this, but this is the gist of it."
Yes it is, and you know just enough to be dangerous. What you offered isn't "the gist of it" at all.
Parent
Re:How about color quality? (Score:4, Interesting)
Which honestly is far better than the Cold Cathode tube in there that fails, yellows with age fairly quickly, and causes heartaches the world over.
Parent
LED Screen (Score:5, Funny)
I bought one! (Score:3, Informative)
I've got an early '05 Powerbook G4 (first-gen HD motion sensors represent!). It's a great little thing but as I do more photo editing and such I'm starting to feel it's lack of power. I've used Intel Macs with C2Ds and they are very nice. I decided that during the next refresh I would purchase one.
So when I checked the Apple store yesterday and saw it was down, I was thrilled. I had been expecting it (I follow rumors sites and Apple Insider had some detailed possible specs on Monday). When I got to work the store was back up and I ordered one immediately.
It's about time that Apple put 2 gigs in the MacBook Pros by default.
It's expected to come as soon as Friday, and I can't wait. Geek Sugar [geeksugar.com] has pictures of the new one, and they that the display is noticeably brighter, despite the fact it's not supposed to be (according to Apple, there is a mini-interview on Gizmodo [gizmodo.com]).
I can't wait!
Now I just need Leopard...
Pun intended? (Score:4, Funny)
yeah yeah, I *know* it's not funny...
display (Score:5, Interesting)
Awesome (Score:3, Insightful)
thinking about it... (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't want more than one (Score:3, Insightful)
That's why Apple has the perfect solution - chording. You don't need to use the double tap right click thing on the keypad. I have it off. All you need to remember is that "Control" in conjunction with the mouse button acts as the second button, in all applications. And
I wish they quit keeping the "price points" (Score:5, Interesting)
I like the discreet video, I do not need the 2.4, the monster drive, the large memory....
so what about 1.66 or 1.83s with similar features, chipset, and such at a lower cost. 1gb memory, discreet graphics, for around $1500?
Are they trying to protect the value of the previous generation still on the shelf?
Re:I wish they quit keeping the "price points" (Score:5, Insightful)
When I bought my MacBook (in January), I was a little wary of the idea of share video/system RAM, but it actually makes sense if you're not doing 3D work. Why carry around a bunch of RAM for your display if you're only going to render 2D windows with text and images? I've even played a few 3D games on it, and it performs acceptably, though has to work pretty hard and gets quite hot. Plugging in a 1680 x 1050 additional screen was no problem and it looks great for photos/videos.
Seriously, if you're a gamer, get a desktop; if you're a 3D artist, get a MacBook Pro; but if you're someone who wants a fully-featured laptop for $1500, just give up on your 'I have to have the pro level gear' attitude and get the black MacBook. You'll be glad you did.
Parent
Hopefully these last longer... (Score:3, Interesting)
Yay! nVidia! (Score:5, Insightful)
(ATI's drivers are teh suck, on OS X as well as Linux.)
((Opinions mine, not IBM's.))
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Apple surrenders? (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple simply issued a statement about its product environmental plans, among other things.
Numerous other vendors were "greener" by Greenpeace standards because they had a public "environmental plan", or even a "plan to have a plan", whereas Apple was silent on futures as it relates to future products, as it always is.
Perhaps Jobs thought it pragmatic to offer its plan publicly so that it would stop getting hammered by Greenpeace as having one of the worst environmental commitments in the industry, when in reality it has one of the best (sure, sure, cue the "but so-and-so is better/first/whatever than Apple is such-and-such category" comments). And besides, I thought it was actions, not lip service about possible future directions, that actually mattered?
But the bottom line is Apple didn't "surrender"; it just published what its already-existing environmental plans were. If you call that a "surrender", then, hey, wave the white flag, Apple.
Parent
Re:Apple surrenders? (Score:5, Interesting)
From talking with my former co-workers, Apple had been working with engineering sample LED backlight systems for almost a year when Greenpeace made their attention whoring report. Apple didn't choose LED systems only because they were mercury-free, they were also looking at lower power, brighter, longer lasting, and far cheaper to mass produce than cold cathode.
Clearly Greenpeace had learned Apple was working on migrating their whole lineup to "greener", so they beat them to the punch with a completely bogus report. At that point, anything Apple did would seem as if it was a reaction to Greenpeace. Engineering lead times are far too long for these new backlights to have been brought in after the Greenpeace slander job.
Parent
surrender (Score:4, Insightful)
People ironically love to bash their own advocates. (Greenpeace being indirect advocates for our wellbeing.) Y2K people are now discredited because the end of the world did not happen - but their actions helped funnel billions into preventing problems especially on mission critical systems. They won but get no glory.
The only good public recognition a whistle blower gets is after the disaster when everybody gets to hear them say "I told you so." Even then, that still creates a large amount of resentment or people upset they didn't push hard enough to convince us before the disaster.
We wouldn't know how bad or good apple was without somebody taking the effort. Greenpeace was doing their job and were not trying to get elected to office.
Mull over that one.
You SysAdmins who must have had to advocate preventive measures to the bosses in your career; and who also likely have to remind people when your plans saved them from "disaster."
Parent
Re:surrender (Score:4, Insightful)
Mull over that one.
I write this as a life-long environmentalist, Sierra Club member, and huge liberal.
Greenpeace is evil.
They rate companies not based on their impact on the environment, but rather what they say they will do at some future point. Their website [greenpeace.org] rates Apple last, not because they polute or because they're killing baby seals, but because they refuse to tell Greenpeace what they're doing. We now know that Apple was innovating in a green way, they just didn't brag about their future plans. Despite this, Greenpeace still rates Apple as the worst company in the list.
Meanwhile, companies are rated 'good' based on their statements, and not their actions.
Greenpeace was not trying to get elected to office, true, but they are raising money. And that's what drives the organization these days, not saving the planet.
coyote
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They're obviously terrorists because they target civilian populations with brutal weaponry.
Oh wait, they don't do that.
Re:Apple surrenders? (Score:4, Interesting)
Look for the Rolling Stone interview with Steve Jobs, back when iTunes was originally launched. You'll find a quote from him about how DRM won't work and how they don't want to stay with DRM forever.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
the normal way to do this is with a very thin mercury floursencent lamp that runs along the bottom of the screen and then some clever optics that spread the light vertically.
LEDs tend to concentrate thier light at a point rather than along a strip which
Re:How does the chipset help? (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:How about putting some Zoom in the low end? (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent