Apple released them.

Except they are calling them the Powerbook the "MacBook Pro".

The top end Intel Powerbook is $2499, where I think they use to be $2999. They also are dual core, and shipping next month.

[Edited on January 10, 2006 at 1:43 PM. Reason : ]

1/10/2006 1:41:15 PM

Dual core laptops!

1/10/2006 1:42:43 PM

zomg zomg zomg buy me one!

1/10/2006 1:44:27 PM

MacBook Pro?
wtf?


Dual-Core iMacs are pretty sweet.


rundown of today's announcements:
http://www.macrumorslive.com/web/

1/10/2006 1:49:54 PM

what's funny is Job's saying the intel chips result in 2-3x performance increases.

SO basically all the fucking fucknut Apple idiots have been wrong for YEARS about the performance ability of their chips versus x86.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Only Apple could make an announcement that their own products suck ass but now they are good and have people applauding it

1/10/2006 1:56:36 PM

only apple could announce rss feeds for photo albums and have applause

1/10/2006 2:02:30 PM

I might get one of the new laptops for music shit.

1/10/2006 2:17:44 PM

^^^
well,
1 - New generation of chips (doubly new over the G4 in the PowerBook)
2 - Double the number of chips (cores)
3 - Hypocrisy


The 1.67 GHz, 15-inch MacBook Pro, for a suggested retail price of $1,999 (US), includes:
— 15.4-inch widescreen 1440 x 900 LCD display with 300 cd/m2 brightness;
— 1.67 GHz Intel Core Duo processor;
— 512MB of 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM, expandable to 2GB;
— 80GB Serial ATA hard drive running at 5400 rpm, with Sudden Motion Sensor;
— a slot-load SuperDrive(TM) (DVD+/-RW / CD-RW) optical drive;
— PCI Express-based ATI Mobility Radeon X1600 with 128MB GDDR3 memory;

The 1.83 GHz, 15-inch MacBook Pro, for a suggested retail price of $2,499 (US), includes:
— 15.4-inch widescreen 1440 x 900 LCD display with 300 cd/m2 brightness;
— 1.83 GHz Intel Core Duo processor;
— 1GB of 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM, expandable to 2GB;
— 100GB Serial ATA hard drive running at 5400 rpm, with Sudden Motion Sensor;
— a slot-load SuperDrive (DVD+/-RW / CD-RW) optical drive;
— PCI Express-based ATI Mobility Radeon X1600 with 256MB GDDR3 memory;

Common:
— DVI-out port for external display (VGA-out adapter included, Composite/S-Video out adapter sold separately);
— built-in Dual Link support for driving Apple 30-inch Cinema HD Display;
— built-in iSight video camera;
— Gigabit Ethernet port;
— built-in Airport Extreme wireless networking and Bluetooth 2.0+EDR;
— ExpressCard/34 expansion card slot;
— two USB 2.0 ports and one FireWire 400 port;
— one audio line in and one audio line out port, each supporting both optical digital and analog;
— scrolling TrackPad and illuminated keyboard;
— the infrared Apple Remote;
— 60 Watt hour lithium polymer battery; and
— 85W AC power adapter with MagSafe magnetic power connector.





The new 17-inch 1.83 GHz iMac, for a suggested retail price of $1,299 (US), includes:
— 17-inch widescreen LCD display;
— 1.83 GHz Intel Core Duo processor;
— 160GB Serial ATA hard drive running at 7200 rpm;

The new 20-inch 2.0 GHz iMac, for a suggested retail price of $1,699 (US), includes:
— 20-inch widescreen LCD display;
— 2.0 GHz Intel Core Duo processor;
— 250GB Serial ATA hard drive running at 7200 rpm;

Common:
— 512MB of 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM expandable to 2GB;
— 8x SuperDrive with double-layer support (DVD+R DL / DVD+/-RW / CD-RW);
— PCI Express-based ATI Radeon X1600 with 128MB GDDR3 memory;
— built-in iSight video camera;
— built-in AirPort Extreme wireless networking & Bluetooth 2.0+EDR;
— mini-DVI out (adapters for DVI, VGA and Composite/S-Video sold separately);
— built-in stereo speakers and microphone; and
— the infrared Apple Remote, Mighty Mouse and Apple Keyboard.


[Edited on January 10, 2006 at 2:22 PM. Reason : ]

1/10/2006 2:18:37 PM

Quote :

"what's funny is Job's saying the intel chips result in 2-3x performance increases. SO basically all the fucking fucknut Apple idiots have been wrong for YEARS about the performance ability of their chips versus x86. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA Only Apple could make an announcement that their own products suck ass but now they are good and have people applauding it"

1/10/2006 2:51:45 PM

Word is that they boot using EFI, not BIOS, for those of you out there who care...

1/10/2006 3:15:08 PM

This was predicted.

1/10/2006 3:58:13 PM

Quote :

"What's an Intel doing in a Mac? A whole lot more than it's ever done in a PC"

ZING

1/10/2006 5:24:07 PM

Quote :

"What's an Intel doing in a Mac? A whole lot more than it's ever done in a PC"

Whats funny is that you apple fucksticks keep taking pot shots at the PC world, while the rest of us keep happily working away contently in our PC world, almost forgetting that you exist.

Apple users are the red-headed stepchildren of the computing world, always wanting to cause a shitstorm of conflict just to make yourselves feel better. A self-perpetuating circle jerk.

When Apple does these releases, its an orgy.

1/10/2006 5:35:41 PM

what's that they say about protesting too much?

1/10/2006 5:51:33 PM

^^ geez dude, calm down. i'm no apple fanboy. i was pc born and bred. i just think it's a good shot at PCs. more of an appreciation for their marketing than an endorsement of their product

[Edited on January 10, 2006 at 6:49 PM. Reason : .]

1/10/2006 6:48:04 PM

Frankly, the hardware has never been the selling point for me. I do appreciate the work they put in on human factors, but all the true hardware manufacture is farmed out anyway. As long as I have OS X, I don't really care what processor it is. Faster chips + cheaper prices + same OS = win for me.

1/10/2006 6:56:58 PM

Quote :

"What's an Intel doing in a Mac? A whole lot more than it's ever done in a PC"

i am a far cry from being a mac fan - indeed, i daresay i hate them just because they exist, they're the gayest-looking computers ever made, and only douchebags own them

and yet...this is so freakin' true.

1/10/2006 7:41:57 PM

Quote :

"SO basically all the fucking fucknut Apple idiots have been wrong for YEARS about the performance ability of their chips versus x86."

PowerPC was faster back when Motorola was actually updating the line.

The PowerPC is a superior design but Apple did not generate the revenues to push the R&D budget.

1/10/2006 7:58:54 PM

Quote :

"what's funny is Job's saying the intel chips result in 2-3x performance increases. SO basically all the fucking fucknut Apple idiots have been wrong for YEARS about the performance ability of their chips versus x86. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA Only Apple could make an announcement that their own products suck ass but now they are good and have people applauding it"

I fail to see how you figure this.

Apple is saying that two brand new intel processors provide about 2x more power than 1 G5 processor. This is hardly suprising to anyone that can do basic math.

Apple is also saying that 2 brand new intel chips provide almost 3x as much power as a single chip from an architecture that is going on what, 7 years now? Again hardly suprising.

Besides, it's just Apple marketing all over again: http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisemac/archives/2006/01/the_mac_perform.html

But it's good to see you're finaly taking Apple's word and benchmarks at face value.

[Edited on January 10, 2006 at 9:24 PM. Reason : more]

1/10/2006 9:19:58 PM

i do find it funny who is getting their panties in a knot

1/10/2006 9:41:16 PM

to be fair, my panties always bunch up this late in the day

1/10/2006 11:53:11 PM

Quote :

"— DVI-out port for external display (VGA-out adapter included, Composite/S-Video out adapter sold separately); "

Where are you getting this from? Apple removed the s-video/composite output from the Macbook, and they don't have double layer burners.

1/11/2006 1:42:36 AM

Quote :

"MacBook Pro? wtf?"

1/11/2006 4:46:29 AM

why are they still stuck at 1.xGHz? I figured now with intel they would jump out of the gates with 2.5-3GHz......
What are the dual core Intel PCs clocked at now? Are dual core PCs still down in the <2GHz range too?

1/11/2006 5:28:01 AM

Quote :

"Only Apple could make an announcement that their own products suck ass but now they are good and have people applauding it"

Its "new and improved" and all your other products you ever bought from them are "old and shitty". Forgot which comedian does that line...

1/11/2006 5:49:08 AM

Quote :

"why are they still stuck at 1.xGHz? I figured now with intel they would jump out of the gates with 2.5-3GHz...... What are the dual core Intel PCs clocked at now? Are dual core PCs still down in the <2GHz range too?"

a lot of PC laptops are being released with 1.xGHz these days

also, even with the powerpc chips, Apple has had a more stable OS than any PC

[Edited on January 11, 2006 at 7:55 AM. Reason : ]

1/11/2006 7:52:41 AM

any os is only as stable as the user

[Edited on January 11, 2006 at 8:18 AM. Reason : granted, osx is a little more idiot proof than windows]

1/11/2006 8:17:54 AM

OMG PHOTOCASTING

WHATS THAT

1/11/2006 11:34:55 AM

haha, this pic on the apple homepage is pretty funny i thought

1/11/2006 12:04:31 PM

Quote :

"why are they still stuck at 1.xGHz? I figured now with intel they would jump out of the gates with 2.5-3GHz...... What are the dual core Intel PCs clocked at now? Are dual core PCs still down in the <2GHz range too"

probably for better battery life.. I have a dual core 3.2ghz machine I'm on right now--but it's a desktop. My laptop is a 1.73ghz mobile centrino I think--I'm not sure if those are dual core or not but I'm guessing no. I had a 3ghz P4 laptop once but that thing went thru batteries and was hot as hell all the time

1/11/2006 12:06:49 PM

They're using the new Intel Yonah based chips, which as based off of the Centrino architecture. The ones Apple is using are dual core.

They generally match the Pentium IVs clocked more than 1Ghz higher, and match the AMDs at the same clock.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2627&p=7

It is faster than the Pentium D 3ghz (dual core pentium 4) in a lot of things, and very close behind in a few others.

1/11/2006 12:19:43 PM

Yonah's are pretty damn powerful. I think their top speed is 2.18 GHz or so. But damn fast. And dual.

Quote :

"Where are you getting this from? Apple removed the s-video/composite output from the Macbook, and they don't have double layer burners."

I just stole those lists off of one of the keynote broadcast sites, but...

Yes, Apple did remove S-Video/Composite out from the MacBook, but there are DVI dongles available.
link
You're correct about the dual layer burners.

1/11/2006 12:51:05 PM

It says:

Quote :

" Important: Requires Mac mini or Power Mac G5 with DVI port."

On that page.

1/11/2006 1:16:29 PM

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,1136018,00.asp

1/11/2006 11:38:14 PM

I have an iMac and I hate it.

1/12/2006 10:11:27 AM

June 24, 2003??


But we all know about the marketing-speak.

One thing I noticed was that in the keynote, Jobs actually referred to the compilers. He said the Intel Macs were running Intel's in-house compilers. Previously, (like when the G5's came out) Apple would always run IBM's compilers on the G5 and GCC on the Intels.
Same shit, different day.

1/12/2006 12:46:09 PM

Someone please explain to me the appeal to macs in general - other than the real purdy (though extremely unprofessional) interface.

1/12/2006 1:07:54 PM

I would love to have a mini to use for a HTPC.

Although i don't know of any TV tuners (HD or reg) that are compatible with Macs. Anyone else?

[Edited on January 12, 2006 at 1:21 PM. Reason : d]

1/12/2006 1:21:05 PM

http://www.televio.com/


not only is it a mac tv tuner but it lets you watch pokemon on your doc


[Edited on January 12, 2006 at 1:35 PM. Reason : there we go]

1/12/2006 1:34:37 PM

Elgato EyeTV - full line, all for Macs

http://www.elgato.com/

1/12/2006 1:47:01 PM

1/12/2006 4:47:21 PM

Ars points out that they don't think it will be possible at all to run Windows on an Intel Mac until at least Vista comes out. Reason being, the new Macs don't use a BIOS - they use the newer Extensible Firmware Interface, EFI. Vista will use that (and the 64 bit Itanium windows version and XP 64 does too, but those are for 64 bit processors only) but XPs reliance on the BIOS will not allow it to run on an Intel Mac. Unless there are some major hacks someone can do in the XP bootup process, but I don't know if that's even possible.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060112-5962.html

1/12/2006 5:03:51 PM

^ i was curious about that (windows running on mac hardware)...thx

1/12/2006 5:52:55 PM

^^ That won't stop something like VirtualPC/VMware from working really well.

Does the Yonah support virtualization, or is that only for merom?

1/12/2006 8:24:31 PM

Quote :

"^^ That won't stop something like VirtualPC/VMware from working really well."

I'm really hopeful for a great new version of VPC. I think it'd be great to be able to run Windows on the IntelMacs, but having to reboot is a bit of a downer (if it's necessary). Now that there's no need for hardware emulation, VPC should be able to fly.

Which brings me to my favorite quote from the Macworld coverage:

Quote :

"It's going to be a while for Virtual PC, which should probably be called Actual PC now, because it's no longer about emulating an architecture but accessing it."

http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2006/1/12/2474

and the conversation about WMP on that page is pretty revealing as well.

1/12/2006 8:43:21 PM

Quote :

"I fail to see how you figure this. Apple is saying that two brand new intel processors provide about 2x more power than 1 G5 processor. This is hardly suprising to anyone that can do basic math. Apple is also saying that 2 brand new intel chips provide almost 3x as much power as a single chip from an architecture that is going on what, 7 years now? Again hardly suprising. Besides, it's just Apple marketing all over again: http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisemac/archives/2006/01/the_mac_perform.html But it's good to see you're finaly taking Apple's word and benchmarks at face value."

Because Yonah is not some fucking saviour of a new chip. It's MARGINALLY faster than the P4, and still isn't as fast per dollar as A64 chips.

And JOBS said 2-3 times the performance of the G5, which, by interpolation, would mean the P4 would be nearly twice as fast, and the Athlon XP would be as well.

He said 5-10 times the performance of G4 chips, meaning P4's would be 4-8 times faster.

Based on what HE SAID, you can backtrace the performance of Apple products for 5 or more years, and conclusively say that they NEVER had anywhere NEAR the performance of competing x86 based machiens.

I never said the benchmarks were useful, or that they have ever put substance over marketing hype in hardware. That wasn't the point of my post, I was pointing out that all you fucking Apple fanboys ooo and aaaahhh over a marketing ploy that basically says everything you have bought to this point was garbage.

1/13/2006 11:49:12 AM

Dude, not everyone has to have the biggest E-peen in the world. I wanted a good, reliable computer with the operating system of my choice. I got one, and it's almost 4 years old. At 800 MHz, it still hasn't let me down. As long as it does what it should and is not unreasonably slow, I couldn't care less about the damn benchmark scores. I don't feel mislead in the least, because that's not what my decision was based on. Nearly everyone I know that purchased a PC laptop at the same time has already been forced to get a new one due to either mechanical failure or complete software fuck-up. Granted, they are not exactly 1337.

Quote :

"all you fucking Apple fanboys ooo and aaaahhh over a marketing ploy that basically says everything you have bought to this point was garbage."

Clearly, it's not garbage. My box has been great.

[Edited on January 13, 2006 at 1:24 PM. Reason : ]

1/13/2006 1:17:45 PM

definiltey garbage

1/13/2006 1:23:16 PM

Yonah is not based on "Centrino Architecture" because there is no "centrino architecture."

Centrino is model branding on integraded wireless/P-M combinations.

1/13/2006 1:23:21 PM

I bet someone could put lilo on that flash chip and use that to load windows.

1/13/2006 1:39:20 PM