Macbook underpowered for (full) Leopard?

[zub3qin]

Anyone else have a strong concern about Leopard and Macbook?
Many are guessing that there will be a huge leap forward on the GUI with leopard- requiring perhaps a much better graphics processor than what Macbook's have. This may be especially true with Core Animation.

While Leopard will absolutely run on the Macbooks, is there anyone else who fears that some eyecandy will not work well unless you have a better graphics chip?

 

[Dynamyk]

Considering most people have Macbooks I highly doubt it.

 

[Vidd]

The GMA is not optimised for 3D processes but for 2D it's fine.
Leopard won't feature any extensive 3D GUI features and so the Macbook will have no problem.

 

[zub3qin]

The GMA is not optimised for 3D processes but for 2D it's fine.
Leopard won't feature any extensive 3D GUI features and so the Macbook will have no problem.

If this is the case, why are advanced Photo applications and video apps not so great on the MB vs MBP?

Also, out of curiosity- what exactly constitutes 3D? Is a desktop cube rotating 3D? If windows could spin back and front (like dashboard info settings) and also on their sides, so you could stack them up- is that 3D?

Or is "real" 3d which people refer to with the MB vs MBP truly just related to gaming.

Not being rude- I am just clueless with the whole graphics processor thing.

I suppose if all the iMacs also had the same built in graphics as the MB, it would be more comforting. But the MBP and iMacs (except for the 17" one which is rumored to be phased out) all have a dedicated processor. MB and MacMini are the only ones left without. (and we all know what is going to happen to the mini).

MB and MacMini's MAY be in a precarious situation... no?

 

[SMM]

If this is the case, why are advanced Photo applications and video apps not so great on the MB vs MBP?

Also, out of curiosity- what exactly constitutes 3D? Is a desktop cube rotating 3D? If windows could spin back and front (like dashboard info settings) and also on their sides, so you could stack them up- is that 3D?

Or is "real" 3d which people refer to with the MB vs MBP truly just related to gaming.

Not being rude- I am just clueless with the whole graphics processor thing.

I suppose if all the iMacs also had the same built in graphics as the MB, it would be more comforting. But the MBP and iMacs (except for the 17" one which is rumored to be phased out) all have a dedicated processor. MB and MacMini are the only ones left without. (and we all know what is going to happen to the mini).

MB and MacMini's MAY be in a precarious situation... no?

I think you are assuming facts not in evidence. Apple is not going to leave a large part of their installed user base hanging. The other side does that. I am not being rude - but I think you can relax.

 

[MagicUK]

I have to go with Dynamyk and SMM.

 

[glhiii]

Macbook memory and display

Under Tiger, the display on the Macbook uses 64 MB of main RAM. The newest Macbooks can take up to 3 gigs, so perhaps Leopard will allow the use of more RAM for the display. This would probably make the graphics more responsive. I have 3 gigs and a 160 gb hard disk in my Macbook, and it seems pretty fast for most things.

 

[flopticalcube]

Under Tiger, the display on the Macbook uses 64 MB of main RAM. The newest Macbooks can take up to 3 gigs, so perhaps Leopard will allow the use of more RAM for the display. This would probably make the graphics more responsive. I have 3 gigs and a 160 gb hard disk in my Macbook, and it seems pretty fast for most things.

The 64MB barrier is a Tiger issue. Under bootcamp'd XP it goes all the way to 224MB. Perhaps Leopard will let it run a little freer. If it does, 512MB MacBook and mini owners should think about getting more RAM.

 

[Igantius]

If this is the case, why are advanced Photo applications and video apps not so great on the MB vs MBP?

Which video apps are you referring to exactly? If you're referring to video editing, then this is not the case.

Many are guessing that there will be a huge leap...

But basing their guesses on what?

I believe (and if I'm sure people who know more than I do will correct me) that the biggest change to OS X's GUI will be Core Animation (which allows developers to create visual special effects within applications) - to take advantage of this feature, your Mac must be Core Image-able.

The MB's GMA 950 chipset can perfectly power Core Image effects in Tiger, so I'm guessing it'll be able to handle Core Animation.

With Core Animation, what is important, is whether the Mac is multi-cored - it helps if one core can run the application as another runs the Core Animation.

Of course, I could be completely wrong - some who has experience of the betas would be in a much better position to say!

 

[Sbrocket]

This is not Vista and Aero. This is an Apple product that they can develop for a controlled set of hardware.

In other words, no -- most Macbooks are plenty powerful to handle Leopard's new features.

 

[Mac-Addict]

If anything it will be better because Tiger was just ported to intel processors and Leopard will be built for Intel and PPC chips. Just be happy you dont have to look at Leopard Home Basic or Leopard Home Premium Or Leopard Ultimate Lite or Leopard Ultimate full and so on.

 

[Episteme]

The 64MB barrier is a Tiger issue. Under bootcamp'd XP it goes all the way to 224MB. Perhaps Leopard will let it run a little freer. If it does, 512MB MacBook and mini owners should think about getting more RAM.

I suspect Leopard might be a little hungrier when it comes to RAM -- Apple just doubled the RAM on most of the mobile systems they sell after all... of course, RAM is so cheap now, it could just be their way of staying competitive without the "We don't do that here" price cuts, too...

The good news is that upgrading RAM easy and cheap at this point.

 

[marine610610]

Its all good

You see users on here all the time with G3/G4 and even older Macs. From what i read they are running the current OS just fine. This is my first Mac, (MBP) and a lot of my motivation for buying it is that i knew Apple would keep building things that i could use for a couple years after i bought it. If i get 3-4 years out of this laptop im happy.

 

[snood]

I was more worried about macbook performance in leopard+1 than in leopard, but I can see being concerned with leopard as well.


Anyway, if it's any consolation I'm currently using an 867mhz 12" powerbook which is about 4.5 years old, and the only os effect my laptop is incapable of performing is the water ripple in dashboard. This laptop has been through 3 different versions of os x, and to only have one piece of eyecandy missing is pretty impressive. Here's hoping that legacy continues with the macbook.

 

[psycoswimmer]

Lets just hope there's not 5 different versions where only the "Baby Leopard" can run on the MacBooks.

 

[Sbrocket]

Lets just hope there's not 5 different versions where only the "Baby Leopard" can run on the MacBooks.

I think that if history has shown us anything its that Apple is good about maintaining good performance for new versions of OSX on older systems. That's the beauty of having a small, controlled set of hardware to develop for.

 

[toughboy]

Even Mac mini with 1.25GHz G4 will (and should) support Leopard (with adequate RAM ofcourse).

Otherwise I would start calling Apple "the new Micro$oft"

 

[Vidd]

Even Mac mini with 1.25GHz G4 will (and should) support Leopard (with adequate RAM ofcourse).

Otherwise I would start calling Apple "the new Micro$oft"

I thought the G4 Mini's graphics card couldn't handle Core Image properly with features such as the ripple animation for Widgets disabled. Is that wrong?

 

[AppleIntelRock]

Apple's new operating system leaving an in-production machine out to dry?
I think not!

 

[Eidorian]

Max out your RAM in the MacBook and the GUI shouldn't be that much of a problem.

 

[iW00t]

If this is the case, why are advanced Photo applications and video apps not so great on the MB vs MBP?

Says who?

Photoshop works just as great on a MacBook as on a MacBook Pro, barring small difference for the processor speeds of course. For stuff like Aperture, Apple elected to use T&L on the GPU to perform non destructive edits and previews on the images. It is how they choose to implement it, it has nothing to image editing per se.

 

[Taylor C]

I highly doubt Apple would engineer their next-generation OS in a way that most of the features would be inaccessible to people using their wildly popular consumer notebook.

 

[GusR9]

Straight forward

Remember that Get A Mac Ad named Surgery?
Apple would in a very bad position making jokes about what you need for a new computer and suddenly all the MacBooks cant power Leopard...
Remember..straight forward

 

[wangchunggti337]

Core Duo?

Is a Core Duo MacBook going to be able to run Leopard?

I know Steve said it will be 64 bit top to bottom. Does that mean all the first generation MacBooks are SOL?

 

[Episteme]

Is a Core Duo MacBook going to be able to run Leopard?

I know Steve said it will be 64 bit top to bottom. Does that mean all the first generation MacBooks are SOL?

It's more likely that they'll just release what amounts to a 32bit version on the disk as well, and when you install it'll detect what hardware you have and select the appropriate version.