Macbook underpowered for (full) Leopard?

[Wolfpup]

I wouldn't be completely surprised if not everything renders on a Macbook (though I agree they really SHOULD make everything work, since systems with Intel video are brand new).

At worst though, I bet all the features will work. I'm completely surprised that a G3 iMac runs 10.4 fine. In fact faster than 10.2. It's missing SOME visual effects (like the water drop effect when you add a widget), but everything's there and works.

I bet the same will be true of the Macbook-at worst.

 

[aethelbert]

I say that everything in 10.5 will run on the macbook without any problem. Apple won't leave six-month-old computers that were brand new and sold by them in the dark. It's always a bunch of bashing against the GMA 950. It's not that bad, you guys with your Macbook Pros just go off saying that nothing works on it because you have dedicated video cards. The GMA can handle a lot more than people tend to think, and I don't think that it will cause any problem in Leopard's new GUI.

 

[aquajet]

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?

Considering Apple still sell Core Duo machines, somehow I doubt they plan to drop support of the technology next October.

 

[Wolfpup]

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

Yes. Won't be an issue at all.

...It's always a bunch of bashing against the GMA 950....

That's because it's worse than the mid range card I bought 4 1/2 years ago for $130. That's sad.

 

[siurpeeman]

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.

apple's kind of done it before with the ibooks. mac os x 10.2 jaguar introduced quartz extreme and a good lot of the ibooks didn't support it. still, though, i think current macbooks (including core duo) will run leopard fine.

 

[flopticalcube]

The Leopard demos are using a MacBook. Kind of answers your question, doesn't it?

 

[Squonk]

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?

I think the Intel and G5 Macs are going to be just fine. Leopard will run on G4's without all of the eye candy. I suspect this may be the end of the road for the G3's.

So let's see, the last G3 iMac was discontinued in Feb of 2002. So, if they do deprecate G3 support, that would mean that they hardware had 5.5 years of support to the latest version of the OS. That's pretty good in my book.

People! You have nothing to worry about with your Intel Macs!

 

[aethelbert]

That's because it's worse than the mid range card I bought 4 1/2 years ago for $130. That's sad.

Come on, it's not a dedicated graphics card. Integrated graphics aren't meant to be the best GPUs ever. That doesn't make it incapable of running things like people are making it out to be, though. It is a capable chip that will be able to run the new interface just fine. Given that the macbook is a large portion of Apple's Mac sales (add that to other current systems using the 950), they for sure won't abandon that group of users for a new OS when those machines are still in production....

 

[siurpeeman]

The Leopard demos are using a MacBook. Kind of answers your question, doesn't it?

the leopard demos are framed with an image of a macbook. it doesn't necessarily mean it's being produced on a macbook.

 

[flopticalcube]

the leopard demos are framed with an image of a macbook. it doesn't necessarily mean it's being produced on a macbook.

All things are possible, most of which is unlikely.

 

[M3G4]

I say that everything in 10.5 will run on the macbook without any problem. Apple won't leave six-month-old computers that were brand new and sold by them in the dark. It's always a bunch of bashing against the GMA 950. It's not that bad, you guys with your Macbook Pros just go off saying that nothing works on it because you have dedicated video cards. The GMA can handle a lot more than people tend to think, and I don't think that it will cause any problem in Leopard's new GUI.

I think I love you.

I highly doubt, like Akonradi says, that apple will willingly write-off computers that, only a year or so ago, were cutting edge. The G3's can STILL run the latest OS for crying out loud! The Macbook be it 32 or the newer 64bit will run Leopard, and as ever, the integrated graphics will affect NOTHING apart from games.

 

[zub3qin]

The Leopard demos are using a MacBook. Kind of answers your question, doesn't it?

Yeah but that's cause Steve has special Macbooks with super Ghz processors and better GPUs. Those are the ones coming out in September so all of us have to update our hardware again.

 

[aethelbert]

Yes, the demos are "on a macbook." It's just like the front row demos on all the hardware information pages. The same demo on five different screens...it means nothing, but that does not make me doubt that 10.5 will run well on the macbook because the hardware is fine as it is on the macbook.

 

[Episteme]

That's because it's worse than the mid range card I bought 4 1/2 years ago for $130. That's sad.

It's worse than that.

According to a few benchmarks I read online it's actually slower than my GeForce2 MX card that I bought in 2000. Yes, that's right, a *budget* card from 2000.

That's beyond sad.

 

[flopticalcube]

Don't understand the hangup people have with the GMA950. It does the job it was designed to do and most people who have it are satisfied with its performance. It is useless to compare it with gaming cards from 10 years ago or whatever as it was never meant as a gaming device. Most computer users DON'T play games on their computers.

 

[aethelbert]

That's beyond sad.

That's not the point. The question was if the macbook will run 10.5. It will most certianly run it well. It's an integrated card, I mean, what do you expect? It's going to smoothly run Leopard. Why even bother to compare it to a dedicated card saying that it's a different product entirely?

 

[blueflame]

I beg to differ....

when ichat was released with multi user chatting, powerbooks of the time could not multi video chat host. That was very annoying to me at the time.
A

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

 

[Episteme]

I say that everything in 10.5 will run on the macbook without any problem. Apple won't leave six-month-old computers that were brand new and sold by them in the dark. It's always a bunch of bashing against the GMA 950. It's not that bad, you guys with your Macbook Pros just go off saying that nothing works on it because you have dedicated video cards. The GMA can handle a lot more than people tend to think, and I don't think that it will cause any problem in Leopard's new GUI.

GMA950's pretty awful if you actually want to do any 3D stuff. Or even any 2D stuff at higher resolutions...

For basic usage - browsing, email, Word, it's acceptable. The fact that it's the baseline affects everyone, unfortunately.

The only good thing about it is it's so poor, it doesn't use a lot of power.

One thing I am curious about -- EA announced they're supporting the Mac again. Once they release a game or two and someone tries 'em on a MacBook or low-end iMac, I suspect there'll be some whaling and gnashing of teeth...

 

[aethelbert]

when ichat was released with multi user chatting, powerbooks of the time could not multi video chat host. That was very annoying to me at the time.
A

There's a difference between a single application and a full OS. Since 10.5 has been in production for many months, remember that they didn't have the nvidia 8000 series when they started. Yet they still had beta versions out before the new video cards.

 

[zub3qin]

That's not the point. The question was if the macbook will run 10.5. It will most certianly run it well. It's an integrated card, I mean, what do you expect? It's going to smoothly run Leopard. Why even bother to compare it to a dedicated card saying that it's a different product entirely?

I think the concern is not running it, but not losing out on eyecandy.
There have been reports of Macbooks not running coverflow too well (some sort of bar or blur)-- which the pro's and iMacs do not do. So there is clearly some sort of graphics-heavy processing going on with cover flow.

Is it only going to be worse with coverflow for leopard finder? And quickview? etc?

 

[Episteme]

That's not the point. The question was if the macbook will run 10.5. It will most certianly run it well. It's an integrated card, I mean, what do you expect? It's going to smoothly run Leopard. Why even bother to compare it to a dedicated card saying that it's a different product entirely?

Uh... it's not a different product. Both do the exact same thing.

It's video output for a computer.

It. Pushes. Pixels.

I'm sure it will run 10.5 fine. Apple can't afford to release a 10.5 that it won't run fine.

That doesn't stop GMA950 from being crummy.

 

[Spanky Deluxe]

Leopard will run without any problems whatsoever, fully feature compatible, on a MacBook.

Earlier generation MacBooks that aren't 32 bit will work too, fully featured without any problems whatsoever apart from not being able to make use of the 64 bit optimisations - unlikely to make any real difference to 99% of MacBook users.

The fact that the demos for Leopard on the Apple site are 'using' a MacBook should give the game away a little.

<rant>

And please, could people please quit their whining about the GMA950?? It fully supports all of the bells and whistles of Tiger and Leopard. No, its not meant to be used for games, the fact that it lets some games run ok is a bonus. Yes it will run Tiger and Leopard fine at all the resolutions it supports, i.e. up to 1920x1200 on an external display.

</rant>

 

[aethelbert]

Yes, there is a difference between an integrated notebook GPU and a dedicated desktop card. I never said that the GMA950 was good, I just said that it's not as bad as people here make it seem to be. We can compare it with the nvidia 8000 series, fine. The 8600M will come out better every time, but that does not mean that the GMA950 is not good enough for Leopard, nor does that make it a bad GPU.

 

[blueflame]

I guess I should clarify, I think 10.5 will run just fine on a macbook. but this is an example of apple not supporting something on their current hardware.
A

There's a difference between a single application and a full OS. Since 10.5 has been in production for many months, remember that they didn't have the nvidia 8000 series when they started. Yet they still had beta versions out before the new video cards.

 

[aethelbert]

I guess I should clarify, I think 10.5 will run just fine on a macbook. but this is an example of apple not supporting something on their current hardware.
A

Even today, though, thsoe levels of streaming video won't work with many computers on the market. Apple really couldn't do much about that, but you are correct with that note.