[catstudioth]

I agree with you. The only reason that Apple omitted Firewire port in MacBook is, they afraid it will take away sell from Pro model. I'm currently looking to buy a new MacBook but with no firewire port, I'm not gonna buy it, Pro model is too expensive and too big for me. At first, I thought because Apple want to cut cost, but how much cost it can cut since they're the owner of Firewire technology ? So, right now I will buy the older model with firewire port and wish that Apple sell total of 10 New MacBook worldwide, so they will put the Firewire back in the next model . C'mon Apple, people are not stupid, Firewire is better than USB 2 in term of reliability and throughput.

[JimMain]

Rob said:

Apple either needs to bring FireWire connectivity back in future revisions of the Macbook or make future releases of Mac OS bootable on USB2 external drives.

Done, Mac OSX is already bootable on USB. I have a USB thumb drive with an OS install I boot off for troubleshooting.

Jim

[DarinW]

I was ready for gaming back when EA said they were back. Back not supporting their software. The fact is most mac games don't connect to the pc game counterpart's server. What kind of community does this create? Hardly any! I try to play Quake 4 and I see maybe 20 servers and they are all empty!!! What is the point. They need to merge gaming servers so everyone is on the same page.

[Peter Cohen]

DarinW said:

I was ready for gaming back when EA said they were back. Back not supporting their software. The fact is most mac games don't connect to the pc game counterpart's server.

All of EA's 2007-era released games that feature multiplayer support work the same on the Mac as they do on the PC, and connect to the same servers. If they're empty, they're empty for PC users as well. EA's 2007-era released games all use Cider, a translation layer technology that enables the Windows game to run on the Mac, so it's the same networking code. I've run into a couple of circumstances where the Mac version and the PC version both needed to be patched in order to operate with fixes or cheat improvements made to the server, but that's it. There's no segregation, as there has been in the past when you've had games that use one kind of networking technology on the PC and another on the Mac.

Quote

What kind of community does this create? Hardly any! I try to play Quake 4 and I see maybe 20 servers and they are all empty!!! What is the point. They need to merge gaming servers so everyone is on the same page.

First of all, Quake 4 is not an EA product, and they have nothing to do with it. It was developed by Raven Software in coordination with Id Software, published for the PC by Activision, and brought to the Mac by Aspyr Media. And Quake 4 and other games that use the same engine technology employ platform-agnostic methods for multiplayer gaming, so again, what platform you're on is not an issue. The only time that's not the case is if the client falls out of sync with the servers because of some update, but Aspyr's been good about staying on top of that if and when it happens with new patches.

[DarinW]

Plain simple wrong lol. Try to connect to a pc server running quake 4 on a mac. It isn't going to happen. Why? There are mods that aren't supported. The only games I see on a mac that actually run with a community is WoW. No thank you. It doesn't take hardly any graphics what so ever to even run this. Integrated video does just fine.

[trip1ex]

I think the headline should read, "New MacBook finally able to play some games of the last four years. Maybe even some new releases." ;)

I don't know. I'm glad it got a boost. It does make it more appealing to me, but I don't think any bragging is on order when the gpu will be 1/2 the power of a 8600gt and that stat is from Apple's PR which can only mean the reality will be worse. :)

The 8600gt was Nvidia's low-end gaming gpu when it came out a few years ago.

[Imagine_Engine]

Whether for gamers, artists, video editors or compositors it would of made more sense to offer SLI graphics GPU instead of providing one low-end GPU and one high-end GPU both which require the user to log out and log back in to use one or the other. Neither GPU can be used at the same time due to both are different GPU chips thus SLI is not what this MBP provides. Also what about Apple thinking different by providing Blu-Ray DVD RW for HD media storage/playback? Where's a 17" HD non-gloss display for real working professionals and not just a MBP 15" for gamers and the occasional Joe/Jane user? As an avid Mac user and Artist that's invested a lot of time and money into Apple products I'm seriously disappointed with this release.

[Slash22]

What are the chances of Apple putting the GeForce 9400M in the Mac Mini? I'd buy the thing in a heartbeat if they did.

[alexhardy]

I've played a few games on the MacBook Pro core duo I use at work and it was fine.
... I say that as someone that cares much more about frame rate than graphical detail though ...
The new MacBooks should be much better - I'm definitely buying one.
As long as I can play a bit of Team Fortress 2, World of Goo etc between work sessions I'm very happy.
Don't want to be an Apple apologist but does anyone think that the MacBook will ever be the hardcore gamer's machine of choice? Of course not.
If I want to play the likes of Dead Space (which I definitely do!) I'll buy it for my Xbox 360 and spend the money I saved by buying a MacBook rather than a 'Pro on a HDTV :D
The lack of firewire is a shame, but in five years with my iMac G5 I never used it. Apple have a long history of making awkward compromises with their consumer machines (I remember having only one serial port on my Performa so I had to juggle my modem and printer!)
If it's the price of decent graphics I'll pay it.

[robco]

The GPU is limited by the size of the MacBook. The Pro has extra room for additional cooling, the MacBook does not. My current MacBook with the GMA 950 gets hot enough as it is, I could only imagine how hot it would be with a faster graphics chip. Even the 9400M has to be downclocked to work in the Air. The Dell XPS 1330 has to be content with an 8400M - it just can't deal with the extra heat from faster chips. The MacBook also has a relatively low resolution on its built-in display, so hopefully it can run modern games at medium settings. If the MacBook were to get faster graphics, it would need to be a thicker, heavier machine.

Apple can manage a lot of technical wizardry, but breaking the laws of thermodynamics isn't in their skillset.

[IEBA1]

Per question #1, FCP "realtime" playback from the timeline is ALL about the GPU and it is the main reason "Pro" laptops had real GPU's and the MacBook (with Firewire) was limited to integrated graphics. But (maybe because of the iPhone games) Apple now sees the value of games and potential gaming users so they upped the GPU capability.

As they were touting the MacBook's new GPU (great for FCP RT effects and Motion capability...) I was reaching for my credit card. Luckily I realized that Apple gave GPU but taketh away FireWire before giving them my hard-earned money.

As a 20-year video veteran, I have a dedicated video editing machine at work, but also expect that my personal machine (as almost every Mac since 1999) will have FireWire on it so I can digitize my family trips- shot on DV and now HDV.

Without FireWire (or an expansion slot where I can add the option) the MacBook is dead to me.

http://techthoughts....rewire-be-gone/

I'd consider maybe making my next camcorder one of those that shoot on SD cards, or that use optical media like mini Blu-ray disks, but Apple is really giving us end users a "bag of hurt" by not giving macs the ability to read 3" optical disks at all, and absolutely no flash media slots. Now the removal of FireWire...

w t f !

If Apple was really about giving us what we need, they'd couple the removal of modem, FireWire, etc., with the addition of an expansion slot so we could add in the one feature we need most, or even change our computer's capability. ExpressCard is okay but I'd like to see a flush-mounting solution that could be left in and looked invisible. This way I could give my laptop a serial controller, FireWire, Modem, IR, SATA, SC card reader, or a third video output- for that wraparound gaming experience... or some other capability that Apple clearly doesn't give a damn about- but I absolutely need and am willing to pay for.

Anthony

[Peter Cohen]

Slash22 said:

What are the chances of Apple putting the GeForce 9400M in the Mac Mini? I'd buy the thing in a heartbeat if they did.

I'm sure it's only a matter of time.

[sujovian]

IEBA1 said:

Per question #1, FCP "realtime" playback from the timeline is ALL about the GPU and it is the main reason "Pro" laptops had real GPU's and the MacBook (with Firewire) was limited to integrated graphics.

Wrong.

While Motion and Color use the GPU heavily, all Final Cut Pro video rendering and processing is done on the main CPU with the exception of some FXplug filters and effects processes which can utilize GPU hardware acceleration. FCP itself does not.

[IEBA1]

[quote name='sujovian']
>

IEBA1 said:

> Per question #1, FCP "realtime" playback from the timeline is ALL about the GPU and it is the main reason "Pro" laptops had real GPU's and the MacBook (with Firewire) was limited to integrated graphics.

Wrong.

While Motion and Color use the GPU heavily, ... with the exception of some FXplug filters and effects processes which can utilize GPU hardware acceleration. FCP itself does not.

sujovian, let me give you an example from my direct experience which proves how FCP relies heavily on the GPU:

New Mac Pro, 8 cores, 10 GB RAM, Full 1920x1080i footage in Apple ProRes422.
Internal RAID capable of nearly 300 MBps.

In FCP-6, Take the video clip and create five 50% opaque layers.
Set the RT manager to Unlimited RT, Dynamic frame rate, Dynamic quality.
Launch Activity Monitor, and have it show the activity meter for all the CPUs.
Put your cursor at the head of the timeline and click play.
The processors do almost nothing while the video plays and all the layers are displayed.
Stop playback.
Then,
Click Option-R for a forced render of all non Safe-RT effects.
NOW all the processors kick into high gear, rendering the footage in non-real-time.
The Activity Monitor meters will jump like crazy.

Part 1- FCP does heavily leverage the GPU on any realtime effects that FCP offers.
Part-2- non-real-time rendering uses the CPU.

Try it and then tell me HOW I'm wrong.

Anthony
- - - - - - - - -
Anthony Burokas * Digital Video Specialist
IEBA Communications * http://IEBA.com
Technical Director all 13 seasons: http://FlavorsOfAmerica.com
Contributing Editor and Columnist, HD Today * http://EventDV.net
Industry blogger: http://TechThoughts.org