10 comments on “The New Apple Laptops – Is It For Photographers?

  1. Just a quick point about the FireWire issue. Assuming one gets a MacBook Pro and has FireWire 400 devices, you can just get a FW 400 to 800 cable – no need for a card with a FW 400 interface on it. Sure, it’s still about $20 for a cable that you shouldn’t need, but it’s better than having to buy a card.

    Now, for the plain MacBook … well, that was just a dumb decision on Apple’s part if you ask me. 😉

  2. Boy, I’m with you Mike, regarding the glossy screen. I just can’t stand ’em. Not only won’t I be buying one of these new ‘books because of this issue; I’m strangely disturbed that Apple would act so oblivious to the needs of one of its major constituencies: the graphics/photo/video community.

    I hope somehow we can communicate our dissatisfaction to them before the next MacBook/Pro revisions come around.

    Side issue: I wish screens weren’t all so widescreen these days. I need pixel dimension height just as much as I need width.

  3. I’m sure PowerSupport is already cranking out some anti-glare screen films for the new MacBook Pros. Another additional cost.

    $40 extra –

    $20 FW800 –> 400 adapter
    $20 Antiglare screen film

    -Nice boner move Apple-

  4. As Greg pointed out, the Firewire issue is a non-issue. If you wish to use a FW400 device on a FW800 port, just use a short, inexpensive adapter cable. It will just run at the slower FW400 speed.

    Many aren’t aware that FW400 ports are redundant. Think of it like a USB 1 vs. USB 2.

    As far as the glossy screen is concerned, the LED screen have black blacks and white whites, making it much easier to determine dynamic range. True, reflections can be annoying, but the whole idea of a notebook computer is its portability, and the brightness of these LED lit screens is amazing.

    Also, signs point to the 17″ MBP to be released later this year, possibly with the anti-glare option.

  5. Hey guys,

    Thanks for your comments. I really hope that Apple hears our concerns with the glossy screen. I checked Power Support’s site and the display protector is around $35: http://www.powersupportusa.com/products/kf.php?category=pb

    Also, for the FW400, great to know that I can just buy a cable for this. The only thing that I’d have to figure out is if I can connect the FW cable of my Cinema Display to the new MacBook Pro so that the 2 FW400 ports at the back of the monitor can be powered.

    So, overall, it’s probably gonna be around $50 additional expenses just to make it work to our needs.

    And, don’t include the fact that we might have to clean the glossy screen more often than the matte. 🙂

    Mike

  6. Hey Vito – it seems that the workable solution now if and when we move to the new macbook pros is to put the matte filter over the new display. the only thing is, we would have wanted for apple to provide us with some option.

    If I am not mistaken, when they released the glossy displays on the imacs, they were really marketing it for the people who want to watch movies on their machines. At that time, macbook pros had the matte display and their marketing was towards the photo/video pro market.

    As for the latest ones – I’ll wait for people’s reactions on the screens before I will upgrade to it myself.

  7. Pingback: Photo Borders, Black & White, Etc. « mikelao photography

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s