New Apple Lust Objects

Streaming video to my TV would be v.nice, actually. Is that what Front Row can do, or is that just to monitors?

Didn't Apple already fire/reassign most of the Aperture staff? Lightroom will be better, and probably cost the same whenever the CS3 suite comes out.

Very useful if you're a wedding photographer or photojournalist and need to download and view 500 images at once.

milo:

Look at the required GFX cards here. http://www.apple.com/aperture/specs.html

And look the card here http://www.apple.com/macbook/specs.html

... and because that intel graphics chip is utter shit. It doesn't even have a full OpenGL implementation ... and OS X's display runs on OpenGL. So one of those two cores will be busy doing graphics work instead of important stuff. Grr.

xpost! Listen, if you're a "professional" who "needs" aperture, why are you buying the MacBook meant for college freshmen and moms?

Ally, there are also MacBook Pros (I still hate these names)

Because Apple are price-targetting idiots with more money than style who think black is "cool".

xpost black isn't better because it's cool but because it presumably would look about 14x less dirty. Those white things get filthy within a day's use :(

I'd never buy a MacBook Pro - I don't need a laptop often enough to justify the money. Most everything I do is on a desktop, so an iBook makes great sense to take on vacation (or on location, or as a backup) without spending $2500. The lower-budget model should be capable of running Aperture and Final Cut Express and whatever pro/semi-pro programs it might reasonably be called upon to run.

Check how the intel graphics mini does against a slower-clocked imac on the games tests here. (Answer: really, really badly. The old mac mini beats it, and that computer is a *dog*)

Also, college freshmen can still shoot in RAW! It's principle, anyway. I mean, you'd think a brand-new 2.0ghz computer could handle a 12mb picture file. But no.

UNTRUE. For 3D graphics yes, but the window manager is not going to do anything as stupid as composoting a 2D desktop in software. We've had 2D acceleration for ages!

Some day I will have to buy a MacTel desktop, and I'll need to look for a MacBook to go with it. If that MacBook is crippled to the point where it won't run Apple's own software that I might need it to run, then it's a shitty computer. This isn't even like asking for a MacBook to run a full FCP suite or do some kind of fancy 3D modelling - we're talking about a basic image organizing and editing program.

A year ago you could buy a dual-processor G5 or a single-processor iMac - pro/consumer. They would both do the same things - the iMac wasn't crippled to the point where you couldn't run all but the most basic editing/image/film programs. The iMac was just slower - if you felt that the added speed of use justified your cost, you bought the PowerMac.

This will repeat itself whenever they get around to introducing Mactel desktops, I'm sure.

But here you don't seem to have the option of purchasing a slower, but still useful, MacBook (assuming you're the type of person who uses Aperture - and it's not unlikely that a wedding photographer would have use for a lower-end laptop, but do his or her major editing and work on a desktop) - only a MacBook Pro.

Christ, it doesn't even have its own graphics memory. I thought "fast ram" went out with the Amiga.

My prediction is that we won't see Mactel desktops until Adobe has announced a definite shipping date for a Intel-compiled version of Photoshop.

My secret prediction/desire is that Apple should just buy Adobe outright.

Even if intel Photoshop was out already, Rosetta can't handle cross-arch plugins, so PPC code can't run as a plugin to an intel app. So all the Photoshop plugins will have to be redone as well.

I have no doubt, however, that the new MacBook will be much, much faster. There will be no noticable lag due to drawing to the screen (games notwithstanding). It would be faster if it had dedicated graphics. It would also cost more.

p.s. USEFUL: http://store.apple.com/Catalog/US/Images/comparison_chart.html

p.p.s. £130 for 20GB and black plastic? GET TO FUCK.

XCode is just an interface to GNU building tools. They are total turds and full of shit. No one would build as big a project as any Adobe app using XCode's built in interface. (hint: Microsoft doesn't use the Visual Studio GUI to compile Windows XP)

OH WAIT, AFTER EFFECTS IS EFFECTIVELY DEAD THANKS TO FINAL CUT.