Notebookjournal reviews the new Macbook

These guys make the best review in my opinion. It's the first notebook to get the highest possible score on build quality.

Pro's:
-build quality
-innovative touchpad
-batterylife
-display brightness

Con's:
-display contrast
-hardly any ports

In german: http://www.notebookjournal.de/tests/696/1
Translation by Google (total 6 pages): http://translate.google.com/transla...nal.de/tests/696/1&sl=de&tl=en&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Some test results:
Grafik
Aquamark 03 Punkte 51.414,00
Futuremark 3DMark 2006 Punkte 2.106,00
World in Conflict (1024x768, niedrig) FPS 40,00
World in Conflict (1024x768, mittel) FPS 15,00
World in Conflict (1024x768, hoch) FPS 8,00
World in Conflict (1024x768, sehr hoch) FPS 5,00

Batterylife under (30% CPU load):
Minuten 242,00 (OS X) 136,00 (XP).

Brightness and Contrast
durchschnittl. Luminanz cd/m² 277,00
Schwarzwert bei 100 cd/m2 cd/m² 0,65
Schwarzwert bei maximaler Helligkeit cd/m² 2,10
Kontrast bei 100 cd/m2 :1 154,00
Kontrast bei maximaler Helligkeit :1 132,00

I am surprised by the 4 hour battery life under 30% CPU load. Maybe the P7350 uses less power than the P8600 under 30% load.

 

Phil,you got your's,right?what do you think?

 

Pro's:

• Amazing build quality.
• Incredibly beautiful design.
• Best touchpad I've worked with (as long as my finger stays dry).
• Very easy to upgrade the harddrive (I've never seen it this easy).
• OS X is easy and smooth, even with 2GB.
• Keyboard. Great typing experience. Even better than Z.

Con's:

• Quite heavy for a 13". Especially when I compare it to the Z.
• Mediocre contrast levels. I've seen many Acers and alike with better contrast.
• Apple's anti-aliasing. That in combination with the contrast is a killer.
• Color reproduction is below par. I've tried many different profiles and calibrations but nothing really gets it right. The only way to get reasonable colors is to crank up the brightness to 80-90% but that harms battery life and I don't find it very comfortable to work on.
• Wireless reception is ok but nothing more than that.
• No mDP-HDMI cables available. mDP-DVI cable is quite expensive.

Strangely it's quite easy to get very reasonable colors in Windows XP/bootcamp. The digital vibrance setting in the Nvidia panel helps a lot and the display is also a lot brighter in Windows.

The other night I was working for a couple of hours in OS X on it I got eye strain. I don't know if it's because of the anti aliasing, the contrast levels, me being tired or my eyes degrading. This is for the first time I'm considering trying glasses.

The weight is my main concern. Walking around with the 2kg is a bit more than I thought. I'm considering selling it, someone offered me around cost price so I'll be happy to take the offer.

The NBR review seems to have a different panel than mine.

 

PhilFlow,
You have the 9C8C or the 9C89 panel?

Thanks

 

9C89

I got unlucky. Although all MBs I checked in store had 9C89.

 

complain to apple and they ll exchange it-say that you have a defective display with bad colors...

 

I tried returning it to my local Apple reseller. They would only take it back with a 15% restocking fee.

Are you saying I should call Apple's main office?

 

yeah,say them that your screen has bad colors and is flickering...and something else...say them that you want them to change screen

 

Ok might try that if the buyer doesn't come true. Selling it without loss would be my first choice though, as I'm not keen on the weight of the Macbook.

Although a really good screen would make the weight a lot more bearable. But is the 9C8C really that much better?

 

from what i have seen(in pictures),it really is...

 

I don't think that the Battery eater tests work on MacOSX it looks like the 4 hour estimation was a guess because in the review they state that you should be able to get 4 hours in Mac OSX with power saving features utilised. It did not state that they got 4 hours in the battery eater test with a 30% load in MacOSX.

..
In terms of battery life under Windows (Battery Eater - 30% CPU load) reached only 136 minutes. Mit den Stromsparoptionen unter MacOS 10.5 kann mit eingeschaltetem WLAN im Office-Betrieb mit satten 4 Stunden gerechnet werden. With the Power Options under MacOS 10.5 can be activated with WLAN in the office with rich 4 hours can be expected.
.....

 

True but then on the last page they say

Laufzeit
Akkulaufzeit unter Last Minuten 242,00
=
Batterylife under load 242 minutes.

And they always do it with 30%, so it would be really strange if they did not do that this time.

I think it could be true because I could get 5 hours with P8600 and very low load, bt off, wifi on, brightness dimmed.

Any link?

I've asked Duffyanneal, I know he has seen them both.

 

Ok i see what you say but what battery eater test did they actual measure the battery life using MacOSX? Will this test actually work in Mac OSX? Most reviewers do their benchmarks in Windows and guess or do a proper run down in MacOSX.

The bit that i linked to also leaves me a bit ensure what to think.

 

Oh,Can't find,but will look further

 

I don't know. There's no certainty. It will probably be discussed here:
http://www.notebookjournal.de/forum/showthread.php?p=82677#post82677

Actually I'm not too sure the other screen is really better:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=590786

 

actually,is is very difficult to tell how good is this sceen by a photo,cos there are too many factors-f.e. "camera","light conditions","your own screen color reproduction" etc.

 

Yeah it's impossible by photos imo. I really need to work on it for a while to really see it.

 

Ok i have asked them for clarification.

Anyway what i am puzzled is by how they can give the MB a 5 for mobility and only give the Sony SR a 2 and a half for mobility when the SR got over 200 mins in XP using the battery eater test. The SR got the better battery life in their test and it is lighter as well and has more features like the express card slot. The way they do their scores is pretty puzzling. They don't even give the Z 5/5 for mobility and that did better in their tests as well and has got an express card slot, is lighter and has built in WWAN. I don't know how seriously to take these tests.

About the 30% CPU thing PhilFlow i think you know what i think of that because i have mentioned it a few times in relation to my own laptop.
Also a forum member reviewed this 2ghz model as you know.

 

Let's see what they say. I'm curious too.

I think I understand what the problem is, they macbook is put in the category "Multimedia-Notebooks bis 16,4 Zoll" so mobility is excellent.

They put the SR (and Z) in the Ultraportables category.

For the Z they have a point as it is more expensive, for the SR they're wrong imo.

 

How do you guys check with LED panel you have?

 

System prefs, display, color, open calibrated display, nr. 13, info.

 

I don't understand why everyone complains about this. I like the fact that everything in Mac OS looks smoother and less jagged than in Windows.

 

Because it makes letter looks less sharp. Smooth is nice but readability is more important than smooth to me.

It becomes really visible when I connect an Apple and a PC on the same 22" 1680*1050 display, and then switch between the two, showing the same webpage with small fonts.

Apple's anti aliasing + mediocre contrast on the new C89 screen = bad combination.

 

Hmm, I've always found font to be easy and pleasant to read on Mac OS. Doesn't windows also use some sort of font smoothing? Or is it less noticeable than that used in Mac OS?

 

Windows uses a different type of anti aliasing. While Apple's intention is to keep the original font as much as possible, MS intents to make letters as readable as possible.

This image gives an impression: (OS X on top, XP beneath):



source: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000884.html

This is when I first learned about it when I got the MBA:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=245012

 

WoW, Mr.phil really show me a lot of new thing i havent noticed b4, really appreciate. I like ur non-fanboylism and ur fairfulness
Can i ask about newMB gaming ? how about if i switch to window and play game (farcry2, f3...?) will it eat more battery and less fps than other laptop with same spec ? ty

 

thanks lamdatz, nice to know.

Running XP is bad for battery life and gaming even more so.

Notebookjournal came to 4 hours in OS X and 2:16 hours in XP (under 30% load). Gaming I expect the MB to last maybe 1 hour and 20-30 minutes battery life.

 

^more if apple gives us better XP/Vista Drivers

 

were they running XP or Vista.. all I could find (not that I looked tremendously hard) was a reference to "Windows"...

 

oh my.... im using z currently, like its perfect and planning to buy NMB for my brother because of vga 9600 - my brother really loving playing game and some beutiful design and a little bit light. Maybe i should learn forward asus or msi, ty mr.phil again

 

And that 1 hour 20-30 min would be the same gaming on a PC laptop as well. There is no way around that gaming and high stress on a video card is going to eat your battery...the XPS in my sig has a much bigger battery and I'm lucky to get to an hour and a half even playing Vanguard (an MMORPG nowhere as GPU intensive as a shooter where there is constant, fast-moving, screen images). That's why I plug in when gaming

 

Yeah they only mention Windows it seems.

 

Is there a way to check the screen before buying the MacBook? Or do you have to boot it to find out?

 

Notebookjournal now tested the P8600 Macbook too: http://www.notebookjournal.de/tests/697_apple_macbook_2_4_ghz/1
Laufzeit
Akkulaufzeit unter Last Minuten 237,00

Interesting the contrast is lower than the first one they tested.

I think you have to boot it and even go through the registration procedure.

 

They also updated the other review and it is pretty clear that they did not do any 30% load test in MacOSX. They either run the battery down in MacOSX over WLAN or estimated what it would get in power saver etc. They also dropped the mobility rating score as well.
....
In regard to the Akkulaufzeit under Windows (Battery Eater - 30% CCU load) only 136 minutes are reached. On the current savings options under MacOS 10,5 can be counted on switched on WLAN in the Office enterprise with full 4 hours.

 

Good then that you asked. It was a fallacy in their rating.

But i don't believe they did not measure the OS X battery life. If you look at the 2.4 review you'll see it's a couple of minutes shorter.

 

Thanks PhilFlow, i read that other review. Maybe they made an error before with the category as you said.
I hope that you sort out your screen issues and you can enjoy your new laptop.
p.s i know what you think about the weight thing.

When i went from a XPS M1330 at 4.3lbs to a MB weighing 5lbs i was not entirely happy with that although i can manage with the weight. I soon parted with the MB for a few reasons and bought something else. Once you go lower it is a bit difficult to adjust to something heavier.


Edited to add:
LOL i just looked up and saw your sig and see that you are now selling your MB. What do you think that you are going to get now?

 

Well originally I was thinking of having one system for everything. I'm thinking I might get a 15" for back home, couch surfing etc. and maybe an ultraportable for on the road. I already have a 15" laptop so all I need is the ultrportable. That could be a Dell mini inspiron 12 or a second hand MBA.

The one thing I can't get used to on this MB is the contrast. It's average, but it's big step down coming from the Sonys. Also on your SZ the contrast is about 4 times higher.

 

PhilFlow, you had both the z and the macbook - which one is better?

 

Depends on what you need. What do you need?

The Z has the better screen. The Macbook has the better touchpad. And there's a lot of other differences, I posted a couple of times in this thread:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=311652

If I had to choose one I'd probably go for the Z. Things would be different if the contrast on the Macbook was near Sony.

 

do you plan on getting a Z again?

 

No, prices here are too high for the Z.

I'm currently negotiating a deal for the previous gen MBA with SSD. Let's see if it works out. The MBA is the ultimate roadwarrior for me.

 

but if you could get both for the same price, which one would you pick?

 

Between MBA SSD and Z? MBA because it suits my needs better. I want portability, I don't game and the most CPU intensive task I perform is booting. I'd probably wouldn't pick the MBA as my only system, but I have a 15" Asus laptop too.

Between MB and Z? Z.

 

Interesting topic Phil. I didn't know that the screen was the actual reason for selling

 

Yeah it was one of the reasons. But even if it had a good screen I've would have been annoyed by the >2kg in my bag everyday. That's why I'm picking the MBA over the Z.

I just sold the Z I had here.

 

They answered your question.

"Unser Mac-Battery-Test lief etwas unter den 30% Prozessor-Last. Wir simulierten einen Browser mit 5 Sekunden Seiten-Aktualisierung inkl. eingeschlateter WLAN-Option. Dazu ein MP3-Loop. So entstand der 4 Stunden Wert."

http://www.notebookjournal.de/forum/showthread.php?p=82807#post82807