Which Mac Is For Me?

For the past year or so I have been watching these new Intel Macs roll out and have asked myself many times if I should switch to Intel. (I currently have a Powerbook G4)

I got my Powerbook G4 back in mid 2005, which was the the 2nd to last G4 model before Apple announced the switch to Intel. Ever since the first day I opened it up I have been hammering it with a lot of tasks from the Adobe CS2 suite, Quark, and some here and there gaming with World of Warcraft. And from getting it back in 2005 its safe to say this guy has some miles on it and is still a good computer for any.

The switch to Intel was a big step for Apple, one which I was caught off guard. I knew like a lot of people, back in 2005 Apple was struggling to get better processors into their line up. The PPC G4 was replaced on the PowerMac line up with the PPC G5. Though the G5 is a powerful processor, it took a jumbo heat sink and large internal fan to cool it in the Powermac. The first thing that popped in my mind was "Omg Apple is going to put Pentium 4s in their machines. What is going on?...". That wasn't the case though, the announcement also included Intel was revamping there line up and focusing on power management and efficiency.

Months later, Macs started to roll out with Intel's new Core Duo processor. I sat back and watched carefully on how well these new breed performed. The thing that concerned me the most was running my apps that that are not Intel native and how would it work. Apple answered that with Rosetta, which is an emulator to communicate to the Intel processor. I knew that throwing any app through an emulator is going to have a performance slump compared to its PPC Mac cousin. What I also saw during the transition was that even though non-native Intel apps were being pushed through Rosetta, native apps were performing extremely well compared to the PPC Macs .

The things that I am looking forward to on my switch from my G4 to Intel Macbook are:

CPU Power
Of course the power of 2 processor cores in one package. I remember hearing about multiple processors before, as in dual processors working in tandem, but to get 2 cores in one chip was something totally new. Instead of 100% cpu like old processors, these new Intel guys packing duo processors have 200% cpu. Kind of the two heads better then one theory, or in this case two minds in one head.

32 bit to 64 bit
64 bit is another feature that tickles my fancy. Before Intel, this feature was only available on the PowerMac G5 and iMac G5 which left out others like me on Powerbooks, iMac G4s, and (at the time) ibooks stuck in 32 bit.

More Performance Per Watt
I like the fact that it takes less energy to perform tasks then it use to. Since I am a notebook person, taking my computer everywhere while getting more use out of the machine means a lot. Whether I'm on a 4 hour flight watching movies to editing photos in a comfortable arm chair knowing I don't have to plug in my notebook for the next couple hours. Am I worried since their is more performance that the heat will be unbearable? Naw, anyone with a laptop knows these things get pretty toasty under heavy load and thats no secret. To battle heat I have been using a notebook cooler to keep my internal fans from kicking in. Notebook coolers should be recommended with all notebook purchases. (later I'll dedicate a blog entry for that subject)

Same Great OS Look and Feel
Despite the new processor the OS is genuinely the same as before. No surprises or changes at all.

Windows Maybe
There comes the thought of running Windows via Boot Camp, Parallels, VMware Fusion. I might give it a try down the road just to say I did it, but as far as I know Mac OS X has everything that I need and use so their isn't a big need for the install.

The New Cat On The Prowl
When Leopard comes out at the end of this year I will be ready for the upgrade. Since the processors are 64 bit and Leopard is 64 bit from the ground up, pairing the two should make great performance.

Things that I'm neutral about:

Integrated What?
One thing that kind of disappoints me is the fact of the integrated graphics that is in the MacBook line up. Not the fact that it is there, but that is doesn't have it's own independent memory is troublesome. Instead it occupies a bite of the system ram which leaves less for the cpu to use. For graphic intensive apps its not as fast, but it does get the job done. As for gaming, the MacBook is out of the question for hardcore gamers. It is not optimized for 3D acceleration so don't expect high frame rates for high level details. Any low end cheap graphics card can crush this integrated set performance wise. If gaming is attempted it is wise to put all graphic details of the game on its minimum. The latest MacBook update revealed processor upgrades (no Santa Rosa. Instead, just a hand me down from big brother MacBook Pro ), optical drive upgrade, hard drive increase, but no new solution to the graphics.

2gb Limit or 3gb?
Pre-Santa Rosa, their was a hardware limitation in the processor. The Processor was only able to address up to 3gb of ram which is an odd number. Usually you want to pair up the ram with the same capacity to enable dual channel, which processes faster. In this case the the max is odd, so there is a 1 x 1gb ram + 1 x 2gb ram = 3gb. One old rule of thumb is to max out the ram to get better performance. If the MacBook has the same processor as it's big brother MacBook Pro, then how come Apple recommeds MacBook with a 2gb limit while macbook pro can have 3gb? Even though the Macbook Pro has its own dedicated graphics card, it is allowed the odd 3gb ram limit. While its little brother has integrated graphics that tax the main ram and has 2gb ram limit. Is it just because the 2gb ram will enable dual channel mode for the Macbook, I don't know. My thing is that if you would put 3gb in the Macbook and the integrated graphics take 64mb of room, then theres at least 2gb+ of ram still untouched for it to use. Either way its up to the end use to really decide to try it or not. Heres a link to OWC on what they say about the ram limitation.

In The End
For my first Intel Mac I want to get is the MacBook. Why? It will serve as my starter. Even though I do like the concept of getting MacBook Pro to replace my Powerbook. I want to have a designated workstation where I can buckle down and get work done. So later down the road that spot will be filled with, either the 24inch iMac or a MacPro. I also want a computer to bring pretty much anywhere just for leisure. So for now, my aim is to get a MacBook.

As for my Powerbook, I am most certainly thinking of selling it on Ebay if none of my friends need a notebook. I will make sure this guy gets a good home before I go buy a new notebook.