Archive for January 10, 2006

Tuesday, January 10, 2006 [Tweets] [Favorites]

The First Intel Macs

John Gruber says:

Releasing Intel-based Macs now might be popular with the keynote crowd and the tech press, but it would come at the expense of a bit of Apple’s credibility with developers.

since the developers had been told they had until June, and he’s not wrong. However, I have to say that from the very moment Steve Jobs announced the June date at WWDC 2005 I expected that the first Intel Macs would ship this January. I don’t know exactly why—something about his word choice and intonation, I guess, combined with the expectation that Apple would want to start the transition as soon as possible.

I can’t think of an Apple product name that’s worse than “MacBook Pro.” The product itself sounds great, though. Interestingly, the screen is slightly larger than the 15-inch PowerBook’s (but lower resolution). Also unlike the PowerBook, there’s no FireWire 800, dual-layer burning, or internal modem, and no estimated battery life is quoted.

Originally, I planned to buy the first Intel-based iBook, however no iBook has been announced yet. The MacBook Pros aren’t shipping until February, and they’re not 12-inch.

So I’m getting a 20-inch iMac Core Duo, and there’s a good chance that it will become my primary Mac. If I understand Apple correctly, each 2 GHz core is faster than a 2 GHz G5 (for non-vector stuff), so the iMac should be faster than my dual-processor G5 tower. To my surprise, this iMac comes with a DVI port for a second monitor, and it’s advertised as supporting extended desktop (no Screen Spanning Doctor required). Alas, the 500 GB model isn’t shipping for 3–4 weeks, and Apple’s developer hardware discount is only around 10%—I thought it used to be close to 20%.

The Complete New Yorker

Khoi Vinh:

This product really needs to exist online, but the magazine’s slavish dedication to exact reproductions of every printed page prevents that. None of the articles are available as ASCII text. Rather, every page of every issue is stored as high-resolution images, a decidedly old media way of thinking about new media that perfectly embodies The New Yorker’s digital ambivalence. Content can’t be selected, copied or pasted, which obviously reflects a desire to protect against copyright violations. But it also prevents truly meaningful searches of the database; when a search term is entered, the engine scours only the article abstracts, so if a key detail happens to be missing from those abstracts, it won’t appear in the results.