The new MacBook Pro looks great. The inclusion of Front Row and an iSight is terrific. The Intel processor will breath new life into Apple’s laptop line (that dual core is sweet). The new power adapter addresses a very real problem (the light on my power adapter isn’t 100% since I jerked my Powerbook off a table by the power cord). The return of the IR port is very welcome in my book.
However, I don’t see this new laptop as perfect. First is the disappointment of no longer having a Firewire 800 port. This doesn’t bother me too much as I personally never had any peripherals for it. The real problem with this hardware is the name. More after the jump.
MacBook Pro is the most hobbled, embarrassing name for an Apple product yet. What’s more disturbing is that Apple seems to be disposing of a branding with 14 years of development. You can’t buy that kind of brand recognition with advertising. It’s a name that’s still highly lauded, despite recent growing (or lack thereof) pains.
It was simple and effective. It arguably had even more recognition than Lenovo’s (formerly IBM’s) Thinkpad brand of laptops. The replacement tacks the word “Pro” onto the end, as if it’s a reminder that, “hey buddy, I’m fast!” What makes it seem even more absurd is that there is no plain MacBook. Presumably, the Intel equivalent of the iBook will be named this, but for now, the Pro modifier sticks out with a complete lack of meaning.
Before anyone tries to correct me by suggesting that the “Power” part of the name came from the fact that it was powered by a PowerPC chip, I remind you that this nomenclature has been used since the 68k days. It’s possible to make that case for the Power Mac, but not the PowerBook. I’m sure eventually I’ll learn to use the name without cringing, but I have no doubt that Mac fans of this era will remember this renaming as a mistake, fondly remembering the Powerbook days, long before the SuperExtraMac Pro (formerly known as the Power Mac).
I agree with the comments about the name--when I first heard it, I tried to say it out loud and it felt like I had just thrown up a little in my mouth.
It's sort of like having an extremely attractive and intelligent little girl, born of wealthy, movie star parents, who ended up naming her child Beulah McTooty.
Well, at least we can deface the case aluminum to scratch off the nameplate once they ship-probably won't be any harder than it would be to self-amputate a leg, and would feel about as good to do.
I agree, not hyped on the name but I'd buy one just the same.
The Intel dual-core processor allegedly takes less current while performing roughly twice as fast as the equivalent G5 equiped Mac PowerBook so has anyone heard the heat level coming from this revvy engine?
Is it cooler on the palms?
Playing a video game on a G5 equiped PowerBook can get pretty hot after a while - is it that way with the new Intel dual-core too?
iBook and PowerBook are good brand names, but Mac is an even better one. iPod is iPod, whichever model you have. THAT is good branding. The Mac platform needs consistency too. It needs recognition of the platform by the name of the product: Mac. PowerBook has a long history, but it doesn't advertise the platform. It stays too much a brand for the loyal Apple users. MacBook does reach out and advertises and I'm all for it. It states what kind of computer you have: a Mac. iBook and PowerBook be gone. Mac has to be printed into the minds of people everywhere, like iPod!
i hate this new name. it sounds tacky. i would NEVER have expected this from apple. i wish they had kept powerbook or had at least named this new computer something that would make it feel like we were buying a macintosh computer. that name is just plain ugly.
I think that this was a name change that had to happen eventually. The most common question I get when a Windoze user mentions Apple laptops is what the difference is between the Powerbook and the iBook. The fact that that needs explaining to newbies is a drawback. Replacing them with MacBook Pro and MacBook, respectively, solves that problem and simplifies the naming issue. While I always liked the Powerbook name too, the "Power" part was always gimmicky.
Two points that have also been raised by others: (1) Apple probably figured (correctly) that they needed a new name to go with their new Intel line. Just as people quibble over names like the Mirrored Doors G4, or Quicksilver, people would have soon started calling this one the Intel Powerbook or maybe Intelbook, a la the TiBook. In that sense it was a good time to change the name.
(2) Among much of the consumer market, Apple is known more for the iPod than for their computers. Putting "Mac" in the laptop name keeps that distinction integrated into the product and instantly distinguishes it from PC laptops. Quite a few people think that the Intel switch will inspire some to install Windows on Mac hardware. While I think that's kind of odd, there might be some dual-boot reasons for doing it. Putting "Mac" in the name keeps Apple in the name even if it isn't running OS X.
My bigger question is: at one point do you change the name of OS X? Do they switch to all brand names like Tiger? OS XI? At some point they'll get to 10.9 and then.....?
I'm not a big fan of the new moniker either. MacBook Pro doesn't roll off the tongue nearly as well as PowerBook did. I could handle just plain MacBook, but MacBook Pro, not good.
My main concern about this laptop is the missing dual-layer SuperDrive, S-Video out, FW 800, and lack of a significant redesign. The PowerBook has looked more or less the same for a while now. I think it's time for a new look, and I'm disappointed we didn't get one.
When they get to 10.9 they then go to 10.10. It's not a decimal number, per se...it's a heirarchical labelling system. We may see them use OS X as a marketing name for a long time...even after the version goes to 11.0 and beyond.