318 Comments

• Digg
• Bury

I live miles from a Mac Store and would like any opinions on choosing the glossy screen compared to the non glossy for the MBP. It would seem that the glossy would produce higher contrast (of course if you were not in sunlight). The default choice is non-glossy so I am guessing that it is the more popular choice. Also - does the glossy scratch easily like the IPODs?

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

Just bought mine.. woohoo...

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

I usually rest two or three fingers on the touchpad surface, causing the two finger right click to go off when I don't want it to. Aside from that, all of the new mac external mice have dedicated right buttons - it's more intuitive and overall is just a more complete solution. The more prevalent the right click becomes in mac software, the more the two finger right click seems like a half-assed implementation of a core feature.

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

Even the x1600 is too hot for the 15.4" MBP - Apple nerfs it down to 300mhz core/mem. There is nothing as good or better that will work in the 1" thin case at this time. The 17" MBP runs the x1600 at more typical speeds, but scales it down dynamically when it's not in use.If you want to play more games, you'll have to get a bigger/thicker laptop that can deal with the extra heat from a more powerful graphics card. Gaming laptops are typically 1.6" thick and have lots of fans running all the time.

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

People should note the 39% increase claimed by Apple applies to "industry standard benchmarks". These benchmarks are command line applications, which can be readily compiled for the EM64T instruction set and executed under Tiger. Just by recompiling the benchmark programs for the 64-bit instruction set, which supports twice as many registers, the programs will typically execute about 30% faster than the same code compiled for 32-bit X86 and executed on the VERY SAME processor. Tiger only supports 64-bit apps that have command line interfaces. As a result, Tiger users will generally only see a few percent increase in speed, because most people run GUI applications that must continue to run 32-bit. That few percent increase comes from the slightly higher clock speed of the new processors and their larger L2 caches. Leopard will support 64-bit GUI applications, too. When people upgrade to the new OS, they'll see an *automatic* ~30% speed increase for any 64-bit GUI apps available.A misconception about 64-bit computing is that only programs requiring lots of memory or that work with large files will benefit from using the 64-bit capabilities of EM64T. Almost all programs will benefit from going from X86 to EM64T, because of the additional registers. By way of comparison, 64-bit code running on G5 microprocessors often ran slower than the same code compiled for 32-bit, because 64-bit compilers weren't as good as their 32-bit counterpart for G5, there was no advantage of additional registers being available in 64-bit mode, and 64-bit pointers consume twice the memory of 32-bit pointers which places greater demands on cpumemory communication.All of this should really come as no surprise to industry reporters, because people have seen the relative behavior of 32-bit versus 64-bit code running on 64-bit AMD processors with Linux (and later Windows) for years now, and more recently with Intel EM64T + Linux and Windows. Mac OS X and EM64T are not special in this regard. This knowledge is just not as commonplace in the Mac community, because it tends to be rather near-sighted.

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

WTF I get dug down for asking a simple question? I was truly curious as to why you wouldn't pair up your RAM and I get dug down with no comments, nice. BTW I own a Macbook with only 512MB of RAM and was considering throwing in a single 1GB and keep one of the 256MB in there.

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

*Looks at 1 month old MBP and gets a tear in my eye*

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

I don't understand what's wrong with the keyboard... mine's working fine! <a class="user" href="http://www.designdot.info&quot;&gt;http://www.designdot.info&lt;/a&gt;

• Reply