digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

Steve Jobs confirms first Macs with LED backlighting due this year

appleinsider.com — In revealing a timeline to abolish the use of toxic chemicals in Apple products, company chief executive Steve Jobs on Wednesday confirmed that the first Macs to sport LED-backlit displays will begin turning up later this year.

Who dugg this? Made popular May 2, 2007

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

110 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • MacParrot, on 10/12/2007, -33/+105No reason to throw it away as most models from 5 years ago will run 10.4 (and many will probably run 10.5). So most people who buy Macs just hold on to them longer.

    How many of those 5 year old PCs are capable of running Vista? Yeah, that's what I thought.
  • Ireland, on 10/12/2007, -15/+76Huh? I wouldn't exactly call this late for them to be introducing such technology.
    When Apple does something like this they like to do it across the board, not just in one or two of their computers, and just because there's a couple of LED panels on the market already, doesn't mean they are any good.
  • MacParrot, on 10/12/2007, -5/+55"I can drop $150 for a new graphics card and $100 for more ram, and my computer is as good as a new one, and im all set for Vista..."

    So can Mac users (on Mac Pro's, G3, G4, and G5 towers). Macsales.com is your friend. This computer that you upgraded with a graphics card and Ram, is it 5 years old or older? That was kinda the point.

    "My friends computer is almost 10 years old, and it can run supreme commander, so I'd imagine it can run vista quite well."

    That 10-year old computer...still have the same motherboard? Processor? Hard Drives? Ram? Accessory cards? Or is it basically just the same enclosure with everything replaced inside?
  • RexMaxus, on 10/12/2007, -9/+55Then just get one, there will always be better technology on the horizon. You can't spend your entire life waiting for the next gen technology.
  • Ireland, on 10/12/2007, -5/+36"anyone who owns a mac is too proud to throw one away"
    Why would I throw away something I could sell? It's a well know fact Mac's have a great resale value.

    And @ 'ShrimpCrackers', what are you talking about? I know all that stuff you just posted, everyone knows that *****.
  • MacParrot, on 10/12/2007, -5/+30"A PC from 5 years ago is going to run Vista as well as a 5 year old Mac. I've tried it. OS X is a sloth on the older machines."

    That's partly true. I haven't spent much time with Vista and certainly not on 5 yo computers, but based on what I've read in various PC (non Mac) magazines, Vista requires some serious horsepower to run well. Counter that with what I DO know from experience with OS X that 10.4 runs with no problem on a QS 933MHz G4 tower with only a 64 meg graphics card and 768 megs of Ram. You're welcome to check the specs on that machine at everymac.com and its release date which was early 2002. That makes it 5 years old, which again was the point.

    I'm not slamming Vista, or Microsoft. I haven't used Vista (as I said) so I won't offer an opinion beyond what I've read from the PC press.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -9/+31What is better? Adoption of proven technology like Microsoft?

    Think Different!
  • soccernamlak, on 10/12/2007, -4/+26I guess you are forgetting about the clone/backup of the Earth?
  • MrFrankly, on 10/12/2007, -5/+25@rexmaxus: Normally I would agree with you but the MBP hasn't been updated for quite a while. LED displays and Santa Rosa are on the horizon. The MBP design is quite old and a bit behind on the Macbook (no magnetic latch or easy access HDD). Everything points at the next update being a very significant one. Not a mere spec update. It's of course pure speculation, but I would certainly wait for the next update before buying.
  • blackjack75, on 10/12/2007, -3/+20"Nice... my Sony SZ laptop had LED backlighting 6 Months ago..."

    You had a sony laptop for six months? In my own experience this means your laptop will last three more months before the motherboard dies and they tell you it's your fault. (True story...).
  • Quix, on 10/12/2007, -22/+39"I can drop $150 for a new graphics card and $100 for more ram, and my computer is as good as a new one, and im all set for Vista..." - Cputerace

    Oh please. I'm so tired of this mostly-lame argument from the PC horde. I've built my own PCs, and upgrades are rarely as easy as you make it sound. New graphics cards often use a different plug-in architecture, thus requiring a new motherboard. A new motherboard often requires a new processor and memory. Suddenly your $250 upgrade is $600+. Not to mention the time and effort rebuilding your box, configuring new drivers, etc.

    Unless you plan on updating your PC with new components every 6 months, I usually found it easier just to scrap the whole package and start over. How about that, just like a Mac! But with a Mac, at least there's some market value left in the thing, unlike an old PC which you pretty much have to give away.

    The PC upgradability argument is a fool's paradise.
  • falloutsyndrome, on 10/12/2007, -10/+26Another success story of unproven technology, turned to real world technology by apple. Damnit man look at the iPod!
  • Jerome@Gattaca, on 10/12/2007, -7/+23What? I HATE the environment!
  • inkswamp, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16> OS X is a sloth on the older machines.

    I have a 5-year-old 600Mhz iBook G3 with 384MB of RAM running 10.4.9 at home that would beg to differ with you. OS X appears to scale down fairly gracefully. While my iBook wouldn't cut it for professional needs, it runs exceptionally well for casual home and moderate work use, and I see no apparent slow downs. I frequently use it to VPN to work and do network stuff via Remote Desktop and I have no problems with that.

    In fact, 10.4 actually runs a little faster and more smoothly than 10.3 did.
  • Aazlain, on 10/12/2007, -6/+20People who would welcome an Apple laptop with better battery life and 45% thinner/lighter screen with better contrast, viewing angle, white/blacks, gamut, durability and lifetime. Call me crazy but I seem to be giving a "*****". ^_^
  • MacParrot, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17"Actually HDD based MP3 players existed years before the iPod. All apple did was make it look pretty."

    Well, that and actually be successful at it
  • meatmcguffin, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17Earth Pro.

    8 molten cores.
  • helf, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16What? You'd rather them keep on pumping out the same boring ***** as everyone else instead of taking chances and bringing tech that could better your computer experience, help the environment AND probably extend laptop battery life some (I don't know if using LEDs would use less power... just a guess)?
  • murphe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Whats ridiculous is the way Greenpeace is claiming in a big hoohaa they have affected Apple's policies here:
    http://www.greenpeace.org/international/news/tasty-apple-news-020507

    Whereas reading Jobs' note explains that the policies were already in place. In reality Greenpeace were ignoramus' who did no actual investigation of the issue, made a big fuss out of nothing and then claimed to have changed everything for the better.

    I'm a huge supporter of the environmental movement but in my eyes Greenpeace is the same as it always has been - a self-aggrandizing political movement that achieves nothing of actual worth and then claims it has made a difference.
  • knelto, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11"I guess you are forgetting about the clone/backup of the Earth?"

    With Time Machine, just plug in a backup planet into Earth and Time Machine will automatically back up your environment, people and places.
  • MacParrot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9meat,
    Unless you can't afford it and have to go with an iEarth. Only two cores there. :)
  • MacParrot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8soccerboi,
    I read a lot, but unfortunately don't keep most of the free magazines I either get or have access to. So I cheated.

    From Wikipedia:
    "Some controversy and concerns have arisen over how the increase in hardware specifications required to take advantage of many of Vista's new features may have an impact on both personal and business users. While most PCs purchased after 2002 will be able to meet Vista’s minimum “Windows Vista Capable” requirements, many laptops and low-end to midrange desktops with integrated graphics will not be able to meet “Windows Vista Premium Ready” requirements and will therefore not be able to run advanced features such as the Aero Glass interface"

    So you were mostly right and I was mostly wrong.

    Here's a link from PC World that says mostly the same:
    http://www.pcworld.in/features/index.jsp/artId=4784204

    In that PCs were not designed to run Vista from 5 years ago (how could they?), I conceed the point. There are plenty of PCs from that vintage that can Vista (though not be able to take advantage of some of its benefits).

    I guess in response all I can say is that there are no limitations in like vintage hardware to run OS X on the pro Mac side. In essense, cheap PCs frrom 5 years ago won't run Vista. Many of the cheaper Macs (especially thoses without FireWire) from the same era won't run OS X 10.4 and certainly won't run 10.5.
  • MacParrot, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9I won't argue the point about Vista as I haven't used it beyond a few point and clicks. As I said, this was based on what I read from PC magazines. Not trying to start a fanboy war as it's generally a waste of time. If you say it runs fine on a 5 yo PC, ok.
  • noblepenguin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Or the EarthBook for portability. And the EarthBook Pro for the mobile professional…
  • MacParrot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Wow hdtv,
    Someone pee in your cornflakes today? Are you always this angry or just off your meds?

    I am a Mac user and have been for 20 years. I help those that request it here in the real world when they have problems with their Macs. People who know me trust me not to screw them over. Considering the amount of bile that's posted on just about any given topic here on digg from the anonymity of the Internet, that's good enough for me.

    By the way, you misspelled "associated"...you're welcome!
  • Tenoq, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@ DonRoberto:

    Get your hand off it. You friend is running supreme commander on a first generation Pentium 2? Would that be with the Riva TNT, or a Voodoo graphics card? And what, 128MB RAM, at most?

    Nice try pulling that statement out of your ass. Might work on your grandma, but even a retarded Digger knows that a 10yo computer won't run Supreme Commander. Hell, it'd only run Windows XP in Slideshow-Mode. :p
  • Pfhreak, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7You apparently give enough of a ***** to post a comment in an article about it.
  • Synchro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@knelto

    With Time machine is there a way to omit places and people? There are certain ones that do not need to be backed up. It would be ok for them to stay with the old image and rot.
  • KSUdesigner, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Someday you'll grow up and thank your parents for not doing what you just suggested.
  • alamody, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5/me pulls out his calculator and calculates how much time his fellow digg users have wasted arguing over topics that aren't relevant to this digg.
  • bobartig, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@etx313:

    Mac OS X does this as well using its unified buffer cache, which coordinates excess ram and hdd space for system caching. If you have enough ram, OS X grabs it all, but you won't have pagein hits. Been there for quite some time.

    I am glad that Vista is as advanced as it is (finally a compositing windowing system!). Whichever OS you choose to use, the competition eventually means better OS for everyone. Unless your horse gives up the race and is no longer maintained...

    @other people:

    Can't we all just agree that all our 5 year old computers have old and crappy memory, obsolete i/o, and run the latest software worse than brand new machines? (hint: if you upgrade your cpu and mobo, that's a new computer, amigo).
  • tothemax64, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4My 600 g3 imac runs 10.4 prefectly (as you might know you cant upgrade these) so for what I use it for it runs great, yeah it wont play call of duty on its 16mg video card but it still runs the newest OS X and Im betting it will run 10.5 as well and I plan on using this computer for a few more years as well, id like to see an old pentium run vista
  • MacParrot, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6jero,
    Just out of curiosity, where did I say anything bad about Vista? Or Microsoft? If you really dislike Apple and Mac users that much...well, it's been said about a million times before.
  • JimmyG10, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5"Leave your reservations about vista and how much it owns you at the door. Mmmkay? Thanks. "

    YOU sir, are a Vista Fanboy.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Cputerace - you do realise that you can upgrade the ram on a mac don't you? Or are you really that stupid and ignorant?
    Shut up.
  • Joshuarr, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8Yeah - I just read that somewhere.
  • MyNameIsNiox, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7Kinda in the same boat, if they don't announce anything at WWDC, I'll be getting one then.
  • KSUdesigner, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6"The MBP design is quite old and a bit behind on the Macbook."

    The design on ALL of their computers is quite old. Every single one of their computers has not been redesigned since the PPC days. They've upgraded them internally, but not aesthetically at all (though I can't say much of anything negative on their current aesthetics). Prior to the current set of computers Apple always redesigned the machines with each major upgrade (G3, G4, G5, etc.). I'm expecting to see a complete overhaul of the entire computer lineup really soon.
  • Roger, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Yeah, we can always live on the moon.
  • allie701, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'm confused. Walmart is working to get us all to make the switch to flourescent bulbs, and now I find out flourescent lights have mercury and are actually dangerous. Who you goin' believe?
  • sannm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2umm what? No those are IR LED's in the sensor bar and even if your idea would work its still stupid.
  • johnbellone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Why should I throw away my Mac when I plan to purchase a new computer? I don't even throw away my old PCs when I am done with them. Personally I bought this MacBook because it was the best thing on the market for the price range I was looking for. I wanted portability, battery life and the ability to use Windows when I need to jump into Visual Studio. It works for me. Now, I suppose, back onto the topic.

    I am sort of peeved that I did not wait until the end of the year (or closer to next semester) to buy the laptop because I would have been able to take advantage of this hardware revision. But that's what you get. You can never buy a laptop at a prime time except for the day or week that it comes out. But I am sort of irritated that I won't be getting a free upgrade for Leopard (I was waiting to buy the laptop until around when Leopard was due so that I could get the free upgrade - unfortunately, well, we know where that went).

    I'd be interested in knowing exactly the difference in battery life with this. If I'm just listening to music and not running Airport I can get about five hours out of the battery life (I have the screen brightness all the way down - how I've always used notebooks). For me that's more than enough. I am usually not away from an outlet for more than five hours.
  • srg13, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'm not sure wether you're joking or not, Ambicar, but I dugg you down anyway
  • RoflMyWaffle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I think this is great no matter how late it has been released.. i really think led's make the difference in electrical costs and right now, reducing on electrical usage needs to happen asap... all the lights in my 7000 sq. ft. house are led bulbs... i can run my ac 24/7 and i only pay 100 bux, 100 cheaper than when i wouldn't run the ac at all but still had incandescent bulbs... my average bill is $35!
  • yesno, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm just glad the top comments are postitive!!!
  • anarchyx34, on 10/12/2007, -6/+7Nice. LED's should use considerably less power and have a considerably longer service life.
  • jwrezz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1My G3 beige tower from 1998 is running 10.4. New video card, usb/fw card, and maxed out ram runs very nicely. Not like my G5, but...
  • Pfhreak, on 10/12/2007, -11/+12Cputerace,

    Huh? You can do the RAM upgrade on all Macs. The video card upgrade I can understand, as the Power Mac/Mac Pro is the only one with expansion slots.
  • Scaryclouds, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I agree with MrFrankly, if possible, wait till this next upgrade. There will always be new technology coming out but you don't want to miss out on LED back lit displays and the Santa Rosa platform, since they are so close to coming out. These new features will significantly improve battery life (LED consume less energy and Santa Rosa has many energy saving features), and overall system performance. This isn't a small step but a big leap forward, for laptops.
  • noblepenguin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+115% restocking fee.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 110 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.