[hayesk]

heisetax said:

A strange botched 17" model. Pro Users are known for modifying their computer systems. This 17" model seems to be a toy computer for those that are happy with what Apple gives us. THE 17" INTEL MACPRO IS NOT A PRO MODEL, so Pro should be taken out of its name.

Uhm... no. Pro users just want a machine that works. Teenagers are known for modifying their computer systems.

Quote

I have a 250 GB hard drive in my TI PowerBook, but I am still using the
original 80GB hard drive in my 17" AL PowerBook. If there is not an easily replaceable hard drive in the new Intel MacBook Pro then I'll have the same hard drive in this new 17" model after many years of use. I will not do this again. This final item is a deal breaker.

You are contradicting yourself. You said you still use the 80GB that came in your AL Powerbook, yet a new one absolutely must have a user replaceable drive in the new one? That doesn't make sense. You will replace the drive either never or once during its use and that's a deal-breaker? How about giving our intelligence a break.

Quote

I'm getting tired of waiting for Apple. They just fired another strike. They believe in in thin over usable. I wonder how many other sales they have lost besides mine on either the hard drive changing problem or the sealed not easily replaceable battery.

Probably very few. Most people want a machine that works. Most people are willing to take it in to get a drive upgraded once in the machine's life as a tradeoff for increased portability.

[bigglesworth]

I really hoped that Apple would keep 400 and 800 Firewire ports. I know you can add using the Express card slot but for photographers on the road, for example, the USB ports are not useful but the extra Firewire port was priceless.

[richl]

The "Pro" Thing...
OK, so clearly people have different ideas what the "Pro" in MacBook Pro means. For me, it simply means that you need a somewhat more powerful machine most likely for the work you do. Again for me, that means I run a lot of apps at the same time (and sometimes a virtual pc). For others, it seems to mean that you're an IT "pro". Bottom line is, this debate proves why it is so hard for any manufacturer to design a computer to please everyone. As I said earlier I have the 15" unibody MBP with the 2.8 Ghz processor. Honestly, it's an impressive machine. This new 17" MBP sounds great too (though I don't like carrying 17" laptops). Batteries seem to be a preference thing as well. I don't mind buying an extra, and swapping them every so often. Others love the idea of a built in battery. Point is, Apple offers a pretty good spread of laptop options now. People need to relax though. No laptop is perfect.

[leicaman]

What makes you think the drive is not user replaceable? How about under the keyboard like the RAM? That should still be user-replaceable. Has anyone determined if that's the case or not? (So to speak.)

[Lord_Meroving]

With the amount of spin that comes out of Apple i sometimes wonder they could rake in lots more dough by entering politics.

Has anyone ever actually experienced the 6 hours battery claim of the previous MB's or MBP's? I even remember back to the Powerbook days when they were claimed to be 5 hrs, well my brand new one back then never even reached that..more like 3 and half. My current MBP never goes past 3 hrs in real world use so the 8 hrs they claim here is....you get my point.

Maybe it's just me but i always like the option to upgrade HD and RAM by myself from cheaper 3rd party sources for much much less than Apple charges. Case in point, my MBP came stock with 2GB RAM and a measly 120GB HD. I didn't sweat it cause i could upgrade the ram and HD for tonnes less than Aple would charge. Fast forward to now, 4gb ram cost me less than $40 and a 320GB 7200rpm drive cost me about $85 (500gb was available but wouldn't fit). I plan on keeping this MBP for a long while, so in the future when HD's get bigger and cheaper i might just spring for a 500GB or more when the right ones are available. Heck i've even seen some extended 15" MBP batteries on fatmac.com.

Oh, i'm not a professional-type person, not even close and absolutely not a teenager. There are different sorts of people who want longevity out of their very expensive products.

This reminds me of The Onion's great parody of the MacBook Wheel.

http://www.theonion....ent/video/appleintroducesrevolutionary

[ScarCrow28]

I'm guessing that it's not completly obvious to anyone that the bottom cover of the 17" MacBook Pro has small screws all the way around it. And you can see a slight crease in the metal.

My edumacational guess is that the entire bottom panel is removable. Giving access to the RAM, Hard drive & more then likely, the Battery.

While the battery isn't made for quick removal, It doesn't mean it's not replaceable. You just can't do it on the fly.

[DocNo]

leicaman said:

What makes you think the drive is not user replaceable? How about under the keyboard like the RAM? That should still be user-replaceable. Has anyone determined if that's the case or not? (So to speak.)

Finally a voice of reason. I was just getting ready to post this - no one has seen how to upgrade the RAM or hard drive, so again much Internet angst over potentially nothing.

[Derivatize]

Apple's video about the battery is a bit over-reaching, but your reporting, Macworld, is rather misleading. As an electrical engineer, I can point out two things:

You say, "Instead of the standard cylindrical AA cells that most batteries utilize, the MacBook Pro?s battery uses custom-shaped cells." This is nothing new nowadays. Apple is referring to lithium polymer batteries, which it (and others like Lenovo and Dell) uses in all its laptops, and pretty much every cell phone and MP3 player manufacturer has been using for YEARS. The real innovation by Apple here is to make it non-removable, which, as they clearly state in the video but you do not report, is where extra space is gained over the previous Mac laptops. Cylindrical battery cells have not been used by Apple for years.

You also state, "The lifespan of the cells is three times the length of the industry standard." This is not correct. The lifespan of the cells is the same as other standard lithium polymer cells. The innovation Apple has made here is in the usage (how the cells are charged and discharged) of said cells. By designing (presumably) a battery controller that charges and discharges the cells in a manner that avoids deleterious events like overheating and overcharging, Apple can extend the usable life of the gestalt battery, but the lifespan of the cells, as it were, is unchanged.

[rfsmit]

+> $50 extra for the matte display.
+

Not for the 15" (yet?), I notice.

[rfsmit]

"By designing (presumably) a battery controller that charges and discharges the cells in a manner that avoids deleterious events like overheating and overcharging,"
It's almost like you didn't read the article. Yes, they did design such a battery controller. The relevant part being this:

"It’s built with a chip that talks to each of its cells to determine their precise condition. The chip shares this information with the
computer. And the computer uses an advanced algorithm to make delicate adjustments to the charging current, varying it to suit the changing conditions inside the cells. This Adaptive Charging reduces the wear and tear on the battery and gives it a much longer lifespan than ever before"

This is old technology, and is standard practice for battery conditioners, but not so for battery chargers. It's only recently that chargers have had conditioning techniques built in. But your second commentis just plain wrong:

"Apple can extend the usable life of the gestalt battery, but the lifespan of the cells, as it were, is unchanged."

The nominal lifespan may be unchanged, but the fact is that only by treating batteries correctly -- with some kind of conditioning technology -- can the nominal lifespan be approached. So in real world usage, Apple's five year estimate is indeed a longer lifespan than their other products.
Edited for readability

[bpeacock22]

I definitely don't understand battery technology, so should I be concerned about only get 1000 charges? I mean I guess if you only plug it in once a day, you get 2.75ish years out of it. But is that a partial charge or full charge? As in, what if while it was off charge, it only went down to 75%; then I plug it in. Does that count as "1 charge" of the 1,000? Maybe that's reasonable; I just don't know enough about it.

[Derivatize]

rfsmit, no I didn't read any such passage. Are you referring to another article somewhere else on Macworld? If so, I can appreciate their more in-depth reporting.

I think you don't understand as much about battery "conditioning" as you think you do, particularly with regard to lithium-ion batteries. In consumer devices, lion battery packs have always had controller chips with varying sophistication due to safety requirements. Yes, as you say, conditioning techniques have become incorporated only recently, but we can only speculate at this moment what (new?) developments Apple has made. I'm afraid you will not find any such standalone conditioner for battery packs, however.

And therein lies the essence of my latter point: the distinction should be made between the concept of a battery pack and battery cells. I maintain my ending comment. Do you know what "gestalt" means?

With all the research lately about electric cars, any new development in lion battery cells is major news. To read the referenced Macworld post makes it sound like Apple developed new battery cells (!) I was rather excited to read that, but watching the video made me realize I had been mislead.

[Derivatize]

"1 charge" generally means one full charge. So in your example, it is a quarter of a charge.

[montgomery_burns]

Apple says the new 17 inch screen provides 60% wider color gamut. Does this also apply to the optional matte screen?