Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Portables (Apple) Hardware

MacBook Pro Gets Santa Rosa Chipset, LED Screen 452

Posted by CmdrTaco
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This discussion has been archived.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.

MacBook Pro Gets Santa Rosa Chipset, LED Screen

Comments Filter:
  • How about... (Score:5, Informative)

    by daveschroeder (516195) * on Wednesday June 06, 2007 @09:47AM (#19409933)
    ...a link to the actual MacBook Pro web page [apple.com] and specifications [apple.com], since that's what people here probably care about, as opposed to a "TechNewsWorld" article being the only thing linked in the summary?

    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)

      by alxbtk (1009019) on Wednesday June 06, 2007 @09:55AM (#19410053) Homepage
      Yeah it can run windows, and it's also the first Mac to get a DirectX10 compatible GPU (Nvida 8600 here) which could be a good thing for gamers.
      • by PopeRatzo (965947) *

        Yeah it can run windows, and it's also the first Mac to get a DirectX10 compatible GPU (Nvida 8600 here) which could be a good thing for gamers.

        It's only a good thing for gamers who are willing to run Vista. That leaves a whole lot of us out, until we're able to run DirectX10 on Windows XP (which I expect will happen sooner than most think).
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Applekid (993327)
      "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?"

      How come they don't mention they come with iLife? How come they don't mention the OS has a *nix underbelly? How come they don't mention that Macs plug into the wall?

      Perhaps Apple itself wants to position its hardware away from Windows and being "PC-like." Perhaps it's not relevant to the discussion regarding a simple hardware revision. Perhaps that comment is just a
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by daveschroeder (516195) *
        How come they don't mention they come with iLife?

        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
    • by Niten (201835)

      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 at least bears repeating.

      And why doesn't every article about a new Sony or Lenovo machine mention that it is not only capable of running Windows, but Linux and OpenBSD as well?

      I get w

    • by pkphilip (6861)
      Does windows run on the santarosa chipset? The chipset on the older Macbook Pros is supported on windows, but I am not sure about this new Santarosa chipset.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by Niten (201835)

        Yes, Santa Rosa is just the codename for Intel's next-generation Centrino platform: Wikipedia [wikipedia.org]

    • Re:How about... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by hcdejong (561314) <(ln.tensmx) (ta) (sebboh)> on Wednesday June 06, 2007 @10:11AM (#19410263)
      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? ...bears repeating.

      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".
      • Re:How about... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by daveschroeder (516195) * on Wednesday June 06, 2007 @10:14AM (#19410301)
        But saying that the laptop comes with Mac OS X, Safari, and iLife is important?

        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?
        • Re:How about... (Score:5, Informative)

          by jellomizer (103300) * on Wednesday June 06, 2007 @10:50AM (#19410747)
          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.

          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.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by foniksonik (573572)
        Some new news then... Parallels 3 is coming out soon yes-you-heard-rightparallels-desktop-30 [blogspot.com]. Here's the new feature /. readers probably care about most:

        3D Graphics: You asked for it, and we delivered. Kick around your favorite Windows-only OpenGL and DirectX games and apps in a virtual machine on your Mac, without shutting down OS X!

    • by xzvf (924443)
      It also runs Linux natively. Maybe we should mention that also.
  • updated features (Score:4, Informative)

    by swissfondue (819240) <swissfondue@[ ]il.com ['gma' in gap]> on Wednesday June 06, 2007 @09:54AM (#19410041)
    30-40 minutes estimated additional real battery life for the 15". Although apple isn't saying if most of the additional power saving is coming from the LED-backlit screen.
  • by J. T. MacLeod (111094) on Wednesday June 06, 2007 @09:56AM (#19410063)
    I'm incredibly excited at the prospect of an LED display. Not only would the lighting be easier on the eyes, but lower-power and safer.

    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.
    • by TheBig1 (966884) on Wednesday June 06, 2007 @10:01AM (#19410133) Homepage
      I am very interested in this as well, and have been looking around various photo forums for the past few weeks (in expectation of this announcement). The general consensus seems to be that the color gamut is superior on LED displays than traditional ones; whether this first generation one will work this way we'll have to wait and see...

      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
    • You do realize its still and LCD screen. Just LEDs powering the backlight?
      • Yes, I do. The color temperature of the backlight will have a direct impact on the visible color, though.
    • by jddj (1085169) on Wednesday June 06, 2007 @10:50AM (#19410749) Journal

      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.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by nine-times (778537)
        Isn't the LED just the backlight? If the LED is as bright as the old screens and gives a nice clean white spectrum, how would it change the bit-depth of the display?
        • by jddj (1085169) on Wednesday June 06, 2007 @12:42PM (#19412599) Journal

          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.

          • by dfghjk (711126) on Wednesday June 06, 2007 @04:04PM (#19415725)
            "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."

            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..." ...but not how wide it actually is. A backlight that determines gamut is a crappy backlight.

            "...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.
    • by Lumpy (12016) on Wednesday June 06, 2007 @11:02AM (#19410933) Homepage
      It's not an LED display but an LED backlight.

      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.
  • by Rude Turnip (49495) <valuation@@@gmail...com> on Wednesday June 06, 2007 @09:56AM (#19410079)
    Yeah, have fun taking your MacBook Pro to Boston :-)
    • I don't think I'll have many problems in Boston unless my only available WiFi zone is on a bridge support...
    • On the moon our Macbook Pros take YOU to Boston...

      they are still a great band here on the moon, we listen to them play live on a regular basis and if you don't agree that Boston is the greatest moon band ever I will be forced to disintegrate you with my moon laser....
  • I bought one! (Score:3, Informative)

    by MBCook (132727) <foobarsoft@foobarsoft.com> on Wednesday June 06, 2007 @09:59AM (#19410111) Homepage

    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...

    • by *weasel (174362)

      It's about time that Apple put 2 gigs in the MacBook Pros by default

      Yeah, but charging $750 for the next 2 is pretty shameless.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Bachus9000 (765935)
      Perhaps you can help me understand something I've been struggling with for a long time in regards to the Macbook Pros--Mainly, why on Earth are they so expensive? The (regular) Macbooks seem reasonably priced, but what makes the Pros worth the $1800 starting price (with an educational discount, even!)? I mean, let's take the midrange Macbook and bump it up to 2GB of RAM and you end up with something comparable to the lowest-end Pro with the exceptions of a slightly slower processor, GMA950 graphics (which
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by MBCook (132727)

        Besides the unimportance (like the nice aluminum finish), there are benefits. The larger screen is one. FireWire 800 is very nice. The ExpressCard/34 slot is something of a big deal (so I can add 3G or something else without the overhead of USB), the graphics matter quite a bit to me (I'd like to be able to play games, mess around with making 3D applications, etc). People using it for more professional work can really benefit from the optical audio jacks if they work in that kind of environment.

        I'll agree

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Bachus9000 (765935)
        Thanks for your responses. I did a little price comparison between the base MBP and (roughly) equivalent HPs and Dells and both of them ended up being more expensive--~$400 and ~$200, respectively. Granted, those are being compared to prices with an educational discount (and the HP has some kind of 3 year warranty by default although I don't know how much it covers compared to AppleCare), but that discount isn't much ($200 tops). Even without that discount the MBP is pretty competitive (if not cheaper), e
  • And I don't mean Santa Rosa, I mean... how about putting an nVidia GPU in the Macbook and Mac mini instead of that appalling GMA950?
  • by DohnJoe (900898) on Wednesday June 06, 2007 @10:03AM (#19410167)
    according to the marketing president, "Apple's notebooks have always led the industry in innovation"

    yeah yeah, I *know* it's not funny...
  • display (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Peter La Casse (3992) on Wednesday June 06, 2007 @10:04AM (#19410197) Homepage
    The biggest news IMO is that the 17" MacBook Pro now comes with a 1920x1200 screen option. I've got that on my 15.4" Sager now, and it's wonderful. I'd rather have another 15.4", but I'd rather not step down to 1440x900.
    • by seebs (15766)
      Absolutely agreed. The previous high end was 1680x1050, which is okay, but...

      This is the feature that is enough to overcome the feeling of "WTF single button mouse".
  • How does the inclusion of Santa Rosa help/improve the MacBook Pro? Does it lead to better performance?
    • Santa Rosa is not only the Patron Saint of the Americas, but was also a bulemic schizophrenic.

      I figure they put her in there to try and lure more Windows users to The Jobsian Way.
    • by k_187 (61692) on Wednesday June 06, 2007 @10:20AM (#19410373) Journal
      The big thing is that it will let the macbook pro address a full 4gb of RAM. In the previous revisions only 3GB could be addressed. I'd imagine there are also other power/performance improvements.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Bishop (4500)
        Santa Rosa still has problems addressing a full 4GiB of RAM. This is a limitation of running the processor in 32bit mode. In this mode a maximum of 4GiB can be addressed, but some of that space is mapped to system devices such as the dedicated video memory.
    • by Aladrin (926209)
      It has an 800Mhz bus and can turn off 1 core to boost the other core for single-thread performance. I believe it also has improvements that help improve battery life vs the previous chip.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrino [wikipedia.org]
  • Awesome (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Junior J. Junior III (192702) on Wednesday June 06, 2007 @10:16AM (#19410317) Homepage
    So when can I get a 2-button trackpad? Come on, Apple, that's just one mouse button per core. I want a real button, not a clever software simulation of two buttons. Just humor me, I'm dying to buy one of these babies.
    • thinking about it... (Score:3, Interesting)

      by RMH101 (636144)
      ...the 2 button trackpad thing could conceivably be retro fitted. you'd have to take your macbook apart, but i could imagine some enterprising 3rd party coming up with a click button the same physical dimensions as the standard apple one, but divided into two. on laptops these things are pretty simple mechanical switches and they normally plug in via simple ribbon connectors. if nothing else, it'd stop people moaning...
      • Sure, that'd be possible, but it really should be necessary to perform hardware mods on something you spend $3000 for. If it's going to cost me that much, it'd better come the way I want it. I don't mind hacking hardware, but for the cost and the fact that it'd almost certainly void the warranty, I'd have to pass on that as a feasible, but not realistic option.

        It wouldn't take a whole lot for apple to make it a purchasable option, though. Even with a $100 markup for the extra button, I'd do it.
    • I've used Windows laptops many times, and the 2nd button is always a PITA. It's either too easy to press (in which case I was pressing it by accident all the time) or too hard, which made some right click operations annoyingly difficult.

      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
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      If you normally use tapping with touchpads, you should note that the touchpad for the MacBook Pro allows right clicking by tapping with two fingers. The touchpad can also detect three-finger taps, but for some reason, OS X ignores them; Ubuntu, on the other hand, allows full use of the touchpad as a three-button mouse, though the driver is currently rather poor. I would actually almost prefer that the laptop not have the one actual mouse button that it does - it generally just gets in the way and generates
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by anticypher (48312)
      You need to go try a macbook pro some time. The right-click function by placing two fingers anywhere on the trackpad at the same time is quite useful. Better than any two button mouse, IMNSHO.

      I had used the MBP trackpad with two finger input for about 30 seconds when I realised I could never go back to the old ways. One finger for moving the cursor around like normal, two fingers for scrolling (horizontal as well as vertical). Only one finger or none on the trackpad with the mouse button is a left click (or
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by gnasher719 (869701)
      '' So when can I get a 2-button trackpad? Come on, Apple, that's just one mouse button per core. I want a real button, not a clever software simulation of two buttons. Just humor me, I'm dying to buy one of these babies. ''

      If you want one button per core, Apple will indeed humor you. Install the developer tools, and you can turn off one core.
  • by Shivetya (243324) on Wednesday June 06, 2007 @10:17AM (#19410335) Homepage Journal
    and allow for most variety in configurations so that there would be "Pro" level laptops at more affordable prices.

    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?
    • by Fex303 (557896) on Wednesday June 06, 2007 @11:06AM (#19410975)

      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?
      Ummm... Because at that pricepoint they have the black MacBook? And the only real difference between what you're describing and a standard MacBook is the separate video card.

      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.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by sootman (158191)
      They may be partially evil--trying to keep the prices up--but mainly, it's all about keeping it simple. Yes, there's always a few fringe people would REALLY want Option A but don't need (and REALLY don't want to pay for) options B, C, and D., but that's the distant minority. As nice as it would be for Apple to make all people happy all the time, they'd rather make 99% of the people REALLY happy and live without that last 1%. If they made their lineup as confusing as Dell's or HP's*, they'd lose more custome
  • From the UK site, the higher end 15" model has an extra .2Ghz in CPU, double the Video RAM and a 40GB larger hard disk. That's hardly with 300 of the Queen's finest is it?
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by TheRaven64 (641858)
      The most expensive Apple product in any market segment usually has a very poor price/performance ratio. In the MacBook line, they are quite blatant about making it a status symbol to get the overpriced one, and make if available in 'look at me, I paid too much' black. I generally find the lowest-end model plus a few built-to-order upgrades is the best purchase.
  • Does anybody know if there are any fully RoHS compliant laptops for sale in the United States? (for that matter, is this one RoHS?). If I understand correctly, it must be free of lead, mercury, cadmium, and PCBs for that to be so...
  • by burris (122191) on Wednesday June 06, 2007 @10:35AM (#19410577)
    The old fluorescent backlit displays begin degrading immediately and lose their brightness in a non-linear way. After one year they are noticeably dimmer and difficult to use in brightly lit environments and by year 2-3 they are almost unusably dim. I hope the LED backlights do not degrade so quickly or at all. Lower power consumption is most welcome, of course.

  • Yay! nVidia! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by metamatic (202216) on Wednesday June 06, 2007 @11:21AM (#19411201) Homepage Journal
    For me, the best bit is that they ditched ATI for nVidia. I was planning on getting a regular MacBook in order to avoid ATI, but now I can go with the Pro.

    (ATI's drivers are teh suck, on OS X as well as Linux.)

    ((Opinions mine, not IBM's.))
  • The keyboard... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by bludwulf (39653) <beau@beaugunderson.com> on Wednesday June 06, 2007 @12:06PM (#19411997) Homepage
    I was hoping that the new Macbook Pro would feature the same new keyboard as the new Macbook, but alas, it seems as if hasn't been changed (aside from being more brightly backlit now).
  • by Zhe Mappel (607548) on Wednesday June 06, 2007 @10:37PM (#19419623)
    According to this thread, Apple hasn't updated Bootcamp yet to work with the new MBPs. See:



    http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=31067 6 [macrumors.com]

If you aren't rich you should always look useful. -- Louis-Ferdinand Celine

Working...