Monday 01 May 2006
- platform Mac OS X 10.4
- price £1,216 plus VAT (base model) ; £1,693 plus VAT (reviewed unit)
- company Apple
- pros Small, light, and pretty. Optimized software gives improved performance over previous Mac laptops. Innovative power connector.
- cons Poor performance in standard applications such as Adobe tools. High price. Screen not ‘X-black’. Low real-time 3D power.
- rating
Apple’s first laptop since the move from Motorola to Intel processors isn’t the groundbreaking machine that many were expecting. If anything, the move has made the mobile Mac more ordinary, and the chip switch will put off anyone reliant on Adobe applications.
Question of the day!
Do you share your creations online?
% of Digital Arts readers agree with you
What do you create and how do you share it?
Follow the conversation at @TabletChat
I've just used iWork to share a presentation. I use MobileMe to share photos too.RT @markhattersley
I try to do Illustrator illustrations starting from pencil drawings. I try to make myself better! RT @hariana_v
I personally use Balsamiq Mockups rather than paper & pencil. RT @ithain
The 15.4-inch MacBook Pro is of a similar size to the 15-inch PowerBook G4 it replaces – and is still as slim and sexy next to the majority of Windows-based laptops. Its resolution is mediocre – many 15-inch models have 1,680-x-1,050-pixel screens – and it’s not as good as ‘X-black’-type screens.
All of the PowerBook’s innovations – such as the illuminated keyboard, the scrolling trackpad, and the stylish, slot-loading DVD±RW drive – are still intact.
This latest model adds a magnetic power connector – so that you don’t trash your laptop if you trip over the lead while getting up to make a cuppa – but most of the new features are aimed at consumers. These include the iSight Web cam, the Front Row living-room media player software, and the remote control, though this can control Keynote too.
You’d think that the MacBook Pro would be all about the new chip, but our tests show that this just levels the playing field when comparing this Mac to equivalent Windows-based laptops. Or at least it does if your application of choice has been tuned for the Intel chip.
There is now a ‘Universal Binary’ version of Cinebench, the benchmarking application based on Maxon’s Cinema 4D software. In its rendering test, the MacBook Pro’s score was almost identical to the Dell Inspiron 9400’s, which also has a 2.0GHz dual-core Intel Core Duo T2500 chip. However, the Mac’s real-time 3D score was poor, as bad as the 9400.
Using our usual LightWave processing test though, which hasn’t been optimized, the MacBook Pro was almost three times slower than the 9400 – and slower even than a PowerBook G4.
At first glance, the MacBook Pro’s Photoshop score was impressive, coming in much faster than the PowerBook and even beating the 9400. However, our MacBook review unit has 2GB RAM, to the 1GB found in the 9400 and the PowerBook. Once this is factored in, the MacBook’s Photoshop score looks weak.
While Apple itself and Quark have released ‘Universal Binary’ versions of their applications, Adobe has said it won’t rewrite for the new chips until the next version of the Creative Suite (which is probably at least a year away).
This will limit the appeal of MacBook Pro to Quark-based designers who don’t use Photoshop much, and Final Cut-based editors who don’t use After Effects – a small audience indeed. You also pay a premium for its aesthetics – and some would say its operating system – over comparable Windows laptops.
Testing times
Photoshop CS 2
Apple MacBook Pro: 5mins 42s
Apple Powerbook G4 15-inch: 9mins 2s
Dell Inspiron 9400: 6mins 19s
LightWave 8.3
Apple MacBook Pro: 73mins 22s
Apple Powerbook G4 15-inch: 60mins 45s
Dell Inspiron 9400: 24m 18s
Cinebench 9.5
Apple MacBook Pro: 1360
Apple Powerbook G4 15-inch: 890
Dell Inspiron 9400: 1260
The Photoshop test performs 20 actions upon a 20MB image in Photoshop CS 2. Results are in minutes and seconds and shorter bars are better. The LightWave test renders the radiosity_BOX.lws scene in LightWave 8.3 to test graphics processing power. Results are in minutes and seconds and shorter bars are better. The Cinebench 9.5 simulates scenes within Maxon Cinema 4D 9.5. Scores reflect real-time 3D power, and longer bars are better.
Neil Bennett
Keep up-to-date with the latest creative hardware and software reviews -- click here follow @digital_arts on Twitter.
Submit to:
Click image for larger version
Specifications
Processor: Intel Core Duo T2500 (2GHz)
RAM: 2GB
Max RAM: 2GB
Screen: 15.4-inch
Resolution: 1,440-x-900
Graphics chip: ATI Mobility Radeon X1600
RAM: 256MB
Hard drive type: Serial ATA
Size: 100GB
Speed: 5,400rpm
Removable media drive: dual layer DVD±RW drive (16x)
Size: 357-x-243-x-26mm
Weight: 2.5kg
Question of the day!
Neil Bennett
Editor
Do you share your creations online?