[DocNo]

Hmm, I think it's pretty simple -
1) Integrated graphics are cheaper.
2) Video is about the only major differentiator between a MB and MBP anyway. Why would Apple want to blur the line further? I'm sure they would point out they already have a gaming solution.
Not that many would agree here, gaging the article and the responses to it - but I can just about guarantee that's how they see it.
The real problem here is Intel (and Apple not prodding them more). Check out the second to the last paragraph in this story:
http://news.zdnet.co...22-6184483.html

[VoxLocus]

Quoth Dan: I don't know of any DV cameras with eSATA connections.

I guess I have to give you that one.

Quoth Sony XDCAM, "After shooting remove the SxS card from camcorder and place it in the express slot of laptop"

Taking the card out of the XDCAM and inserting it in the Express Card slot isn't the same as eSATA connection to the Sony XDCAM. You're right, there.

So. MacBook video editing, limited to FW 400 import, FW 400 external drive, integrated graphics, glossy screen.

MBPro video editing. Express Card import. eSATA external drive. Dedicated graphics. Matte screen.

Wait! I have to bring along a power supply to use the eSATA drive? Isn't that why I have the Land Rover and inverter? No. I have the Land Rover so I can drive back to the office and edit in my comfortable chair with electricity supplied by the power company.

Though I guess you could load your pack frame and mule with your video gear, your MacBook, your LaCie rugged, and lots of batteries so you could edit in the outback with FW 400 and no power supply? The country is so peaceful, if it just weren't for that pesky mule trying to eat your Firewire cables. Wait! You've lashed a Photo Voltaic array to the mule and won't have to carry nearly so many batteries? Good thinking!

What does all this have to do with MacBook gaming?

It began with a discussion of the intentional limitations Apple puts in its product niches.

I don't understand why Apple limits the upside sales of the MacBook by not putting in a better graphic system. True, as one poster noted, gamers tend to use and build towers running Windoze. So maybe Apple knows they're not getting that market anyway. But there are lots of potential business/artist/medical sales for computers with better graphics (and displays!) at the MacBook price point or lower.

With its current MacBook configuration, Apple isn't going to sell that gear. Too bad, because the more Apple gear sells, the more useful applications will be developed.

[Pennywigeon]

MacBook = Economy model ....

[cweber]

BradPDX said:

I still cannot believe that grown people care about games on a computer. Where does one find the time to waste?
This seems way off track to me - games should be left to consoles for those who want them. General purpose computing devices with QWERTY keyboard are just not optimized for that. I'd leave it alone.
Computing is fun in other ways, but no games for me, thanks.

It's not about games at all. 3D graphics is important in a large and growing number of applications, starting with medical and scientific visualization as someone pointed out above. Increasingly, consumer level applications use 3D to view complex data. Think Google Earth, for instance. You want a good graphics subsystem for Google Earth to work smoothly and display terrain as well as the underlying data allows. That's just one quick example.

Game framerates are just a convenient way to gauge 3D graphics performance overall. I don't care about gaming myself, but since scientific visualization is one of my job descriptions, when Macworld publishes new benchmark results the game scores are the first ones I turn my attention to after checking the Speedmark score.

[jeffharris]

A MacBook Pro offers a LOT of advantages over a plain MacBook!

FireWire 800. - Try Time machine with a FW800 drive.BIG speed difference and no performance hit during backups.
ExpressCard 34 slot. - You'll laugh at the speed of USB 2 card readers after using ExpressCard readers.
Full-sized DVI port. - Look ma, no adaptor!
Higher resolution MATTE screen. - 'Nuff Said!
And YES the 256MB of VRAM is a dramatic difference.

My 2.4Ghz MBP (4GB RAM) actually smokes a Quad-Core PowerMac G5 in VectorWorks rendering. Same file, HUGE difference. I was shocked, too!

[robco]

I believe the article is referring to the drivers. The GMA 950 cannot perform any T&L (transform and lighting) functions. They get passed to the CPU. Most games use T&L. The GMA X3100 promised to support hardware T&L, but didn't. The hardware was willing, but the drivers were weak. It took some time before Intel released drivers for XP that added this support. Longer still before drivers for Vista came forth. Can the drivers for OS X support it? Who knows. But without it, the performance of the X3100 is worse than Windows.
Another problem is Blu-Ray support. The integrated chipset can't handle playback. Intel is working on this (GMA 4500HD), but the solution is not ready for implementation. Then again, it looks as though Apple wishes to bypass physical media going forward (though why I can't rent HD movies for my computer is beyond me - other than Apple wants be to pay extra for an AppleTV).

I went ahead and got the MacBook because it's just one in a collection. I knew its limitations going forward. For the price difference between the MB and MBP, I built a Windows box for gaming. I also have a 360. It would be nice to be able to do everything with one machine, but I wasn't ready to plunk down $2500 for a MBP. Funny thing is, as mentioned in the article, low-end graphics would be fine for my needs (Radeon 2400 or GeForce 8400 would be more than adequate). I mostly want something that can handle Civ 4 and WoW - neither of which is graphically intensive. And that's the point. The MacBook is supposed to be a consumer machine and consumers occasionally play games. They may not be the latest FPS that brings mighty machines to their knees with jaw-dropping graphics, but games nonetheless. With Apple relying on hardware acceleration for the UI, wimpy graphics chips don't make a lot of sense. Even the iPhone and AppleTV have dedicated GPUs for Zeus' sake. At the very least, an entry-level dedicated GPU should be available as an option on the MacBook. It would be a nice way of actually justifying the price increase of the BlackBook for example. I would imagine it's a cost issue, or possibly thermal. The MacBook simply may not be able to handle the extra heat.

While kvetching about the MacBook, I'd also like to see Apple ditch the FW 400 and Ethernet ports and put in an ExpressCard slot (which can be used to add either). It's more flexible. And get rid of the micro-DVI and mini-DVI and give us HDMI - an industry standard. And why doesn't the MacBook get the backlit keyboard and multitouch trackpad? Cheap bastards.

[Pennywigeon]

It is an economy model.

What is so hard to understand about this for people?

Simply put would you pay MORE for a MacBook if it had all the bells and whistles that a MBP has?

Wait. Why not just buy the MBP?

Smart commerce is to buy the product or tool that best fits your needs.

[Peter Cohen]

There's a $700 delta between the low-end MacBook and MacBook Pro. Do you not think that there's some room in between?

[robco]

The MacBook is the economy model for Apple. Compared to the general notebook market, the MacBook is midrange. Most midrange laptops have an option for dedicated graphics.

The MacBook Pro is significantly more expensive than the MacBook.

[drjuice]

"Another problem is
Blu-Ray support. The integrated chipset can't handle playback. Intel is
working on this (GMA 4500HD), but the solution is not ready for
implementation. Then again, it looks as though Apple wishes to bypass
physical media going forward (though why I can't rent HD movies for my
computer is beyond me - other than Apple wants be to pay extra for an
AppleTV)."

As far as Blu-Ray goes, does OS X have HDCP, and isn't HDCP necessary for playback (even on HD rentals for the AppleTV)? And, are Blu-Ray drives really as power-hungry as Wired reported?

[Originalme8]

Here ya go Brad,

I'm an IT from California. Day in day out I here about and fix problems. It's nice to know that when I go home I can do something else, something that won't give me a problem. There is nothing to figure out, nothing to look up(in most cases) and complains about it. It relieves a lot of stress and it keeps me looking forward to sitting down in front of a screen the next day.

[MacCheetah3]

Hi

Pennywigeon said:

Smart commerce is to buy the product or tool that best fits your needs.

The trend seems to be that it is more fun to argue illogically instead. :D

[ChasmoeBrown]

Sorry, but I gotta say "I TOLD YOU SO"

On this very forum (check yer archives) when the MacBook (and mini) first came out, I railed against that built-in video, even called shared memory evil. I still know it is.

But I got dismissed out of hand, by Macworld's own, as overreacting.

[Peter Cohen]

Shared video memory and integrated video processors aren't evil, and I never implied that they were. I'm simply saying that the MacBook system itself could be a much better value if it were able to support a broader number of games. Whether that means a discrete graphics chip or just better drivers is something that I haven't fully explored yet, but I'm inclined to think that both would be ideal.