macOS 27 reminds me of Mac OS X 10.6, Snow Leopard

macOS 27 is past the Intel->Apple Silicon transition.  It won't support Intel CPUs.  It also will have a pared-down Rosetta 2 for minimal Intel translation support.

 What gets me is that watchOS 27 won't support my 2022 Apple Watch Series 7 but macOS 27 will support my M1 MacBook Air.

 I only use an Apple Watch for the heart-related functionality.  It isn't a part of my style, if I have a style, that is.

 The heart-related functionality has not been extremely reliable, though.  Using the computer and then, dropping my hand for a while is considered a standing activity.  Playing video games ferociously counts toward my Move goal.  It does detect when my heart rate is over 200, which happens far too often.  I don't want to spend money on a newer watch.  I just hope they send security updates.

 In any case, Snow Leopard Mac OS X 10.6 had no PowerPC code available to run.  It was an Intel-only version.  macOS 27 will have no Intel code to run.  It is an Apple Silicon-only release.

 It still took years to optimize it by which time they Adobe-d it by adding functionality before clearing out the bugs.  Switching to Catalina on my 3rd generation quad-core i7 didn't impress me with performance enhancements.

I'm hoping beyond hope that Apple finds a way to use Claude by Anthropic to find inconsistencies in  their code, once the U.S. government lifts the ban on certain models' use.

 I don't use Safari because it's like a Steel Sieve.  It may seem strong but it has so many holes and having its back-end embedded in with the operating system code is a problem worthy of Microsoft, who did it earlier than Apple did with Internet Exploder.  (I use Firefox mostly.) 

 Apple has so much ability to do things well, but as they've become bigger, they've become sloppy.  Besides, when you're running on a Motorola 68040 with 36 MB of RAM, you don't have room to be sloppy.  When you have matrix processing and 96 GB of RAM, the math changes.

 I hope for the best. 

Refurbished MacBook Air M1 is Good

 It's been about two years since the original M1 SoC was introduced to make Apple independent of outside CPU makers.  It's been a success and it's certainly upset Intel.

Having had Apple equipment since 1993, I've gone through the Motorola 680x0 to PowerPC transition, the PowerPC to Intel x86 transition, and now, the Intel to Apple Silicon (ARM) transition.

This is the most difficult transition because developers weren't sure what to do.  After almost two years, there isn't as much native software as I had hoped.  Being that Apple cut off 32-bit software with Catalina, I'm not sure why developers aren't more ready.

Game developers aren't really testing the waters.  The biggest current game I've seen is Life is Strange 2, which was ported by Feral Interactive, and published by Square Enix.  It seems to run well enough to believe that it is M1-compatible, not running through Rosetta 2 emulation.  However, Steam, GOG Galaxy, and Epic Games Launcher all appear to be x86 applications.

Creative software is quite different.  Capture One Pro by Phase One is native and so are Affinity Publisher, Designer, and Photo applications.  HitFilm Express from FXHome seems to not have a problem, though I haven't really tested it.

It looks as though Microsoft Visual Studio is compatible, if not 100% native. 

Bottom to Top, Top to Bottom

I've almost always had top of the line machines, but here I am with a MacBook Air.  Why?

It's powerful at a reasonable price.

Remember when US$1499 bought you a 15.4 MacBook Pro with integrated graphics and a dual-core CPU?  It wasn't that long ago.

I bought a MacBook Air 8-core CPU, 8-core GPU, 16 GB of RAM, and 1 TB of storage for US$1399, refurbished.

My previous MacBook Pro had a 3rd generation quad-core i7 with 16 GB of RAM and 1 TB of storage.  My Omen by HP had a 7th generation quad-core i7 with 32 GB of RAM and 2 TB of storage and it didn't seem much faster.

While I'm writing this entry, iStatMenus is telling me that the core temperature is 30 degrees C, which is in contrast to 44 degrees C on the Windows machine or 64 degrees C on the old MacBook Pro.  That old MacBook Pro could boil water.  When processing video, it would be at 100 degrees C.

Of course, there are many updates since 2012 besides the CPU and GPU.

The sound is amazing.  The display is so much better than the old 1440x900.  The keyboard is okay.  I liked the PowerBook G4 keyboard and none since have impressed me.

Change is Necessary

I bought a couple of cable adapters and an OmniCase Mini USB-C Storage Docking Station from JSAUX.  The company's products have been as reliable for me as products from Anker have been.

The OmniCase Mini is a unique product.  It has one USB type-C port, two type-A ports, an HDMI port, and slots for microSD and SD cards.  US$34.99 wasn't a lot.  It also comes with a type-C cable, and a few adapters, and a SIM card tool.  Obviously, if you're looking for a full-blown docking station, there are plenty from US$100 to US$500.  If you want an extra type-C port for power pass-through, you'll have to pay more than the US$34.99.

Equally useful and tiny is a Crucial X8 2 TB SSD that I recently bought.  It has a type-C connector, but also has a type-A adapter.

It may help to remember that the original MacBook Air came with one port--for charging, for connecting, for everything that needed a physical port.  The Dongle circus had arrived in town.

With two type-C ports, it's twice as convenient.

 Apple Succeeded

I'm slowly getting everything together, although it's only been about a week.  It took a while with previous machines.  I'm sure I'll be satisfied with this purchase.

Update 2022.05.22: This machine continues to impress.  The operating system is not where it needs to be and neither is vendor support for native applications.

Daily use without the power cable is amazing.  That 3rd generation quad-core i7 with GeForce 650M was constantly sucking power.  It was also a very good heater.

I haven't needed the USB-C hub as much as I expected.  I transferred most of what I needed the first two weeks.

I've tried a few more games, mostly through Itch.io and GOG.  They work well.  Steam itself is full of glitches, but that was also a problem for the i7 running Catalina.  64-bitness is not something Valve wants to do well.

Update 2022.06.06: The M2 MacBook Air was announced today.  It's more powerful and more expensive.  It can be configured with 24 GB of RAM and 2 TB of storage.  That would be a plus.  In the past, some would complain that the machine they just bought last year was outdated and practically cry that it didn't work correctly any longer.  I don't do that.  This machine is a 2020 model and it's just fine.

I've had the machine over a month now and it took a while to get things in order but it is a wonderful computer that does most everything I want.  I want some good games for it but that will take some time.  Life is Strange 2 is the biggest title I have right now.

Update 2022.07.09: I'm impressed that they've got a newer processor out and it's better but it's a small improvement over the M1.  I priced what I have with the latest configuration and it was about US$600 extra over what I paid for a refurbished M1.  It's nice to have the latest and greatest, but this will last a while.

Update 2023.06.30: I was checking the prices on computers such as mine because of some pricing on the 15 inch version and I found the exact, same machine as mine for the exact, same price as when I bought it.

It's been a bit over a year that I've had my machine and the stage where I'm impressed regularly is finished.  It's very quick, for sure, but now, it's being filled and used regularly and I've got an interesting Windows 11 machine, also.

Windows still is a pain, here and there, but it gets the job done.  macOS Monterey seems better, but not exactly bug-free.  I'm not comfortable with upgrading to Ventura, but I will probably go to Sonoma, instead.

Update 2026.03.03: Is it time to switch to the just-released M5 MacBook Air?

 I've been looking at the numbers and 24 GB of RAM and 2 TB of storage would put it at US$1899, which isn't horrible, especially with the 10 CPU/10 GPU cores configuration.  My current machine has 8 CPU cores and 8 GPU cores with 16 GB of RAM and 1 TB of storage and that was US$1349.

The M1 MacBook Air is fine for everyday work but has become unable to keep up with graphics software and games. 

Apple's newest MacBook Pro lineup: what is it?

My eyes have been crossed ever since the Apple announcement last week.  I'm just not sure what the company was trying to accomplish and how they ended up at this point.

The Touch Bar looks like great technology and in the video editing portion of the demonstrations, I was enthusiastic.

However, they removed some products, such as the 11 inch MacBook Air and the 15.4 inch MacBook Pro with only Intel graphics hardware.  At least, I believe that's what they did.  My eyes are still crossed.

I recognize that the MacBook Air has become less popular and they make the MacBook Pro line thinner and the MacBook exists just to draw people closer with its bling-y looks.  Supposedly, my iPhone 7 is faster than the MacBook and MacBook Air.  The MacBook with Intel Core M processors is slow indeed.

US$2399 and $2799 seem about right, but maybe a bit extra.  My mid-2012 refurbished machine came at a slight discount in January 2013.  It's difficult to believe that someone would pay $1999 for a MacBook Pro with Intel Iris Pro graphics hardware but there is one in the refurbished list for $300 off at $1699.  I'm thinking that they were introduced at $1499.  Then again, I remember paying for a Wall Street-era Apple laptop computer with passive display for $2600 something around 1998, and that was the cheap 233 MHz model.

It still feels as though the changes in specification aren't enough.  However, I remember when 66 MHz or 133 MHz seemed as big a change as we were getting when Motorola couldn't enhance the PowerPC G3 or G4 further.  Intel is mostly at that point now.

The updated Radeon graphics hardware is appreciated in the higher level machines.  Switching to USB C for everything makes sense.  Leaving the headphone jack does not.  Where are the Lightning connectors, so I can use my ear buds, etc.?  Does the new iPhone come with a USB C adapter?  No.

If I had the $2399 to spend easily, would I replace my current machine with the newest one?

Update 2016.11.04: A lot of people are complaining that the RAM is limited to 16 GB.  One person wrote Phil Schiller who replied that the current technology is such that more RAM would diminish battery life.  It seems that Intel isn't very good at designing processors--or this is a situation of planned obsolescence.

Others are complaining about the ports.  I'm finding it interesting to require a dock or a lot of cables to convert to the proper connector.

Further, a company called Plugable has noticed that their products are not compatible with Thunderbolt 3 in the new computers, because they use a Texas Instruments controller.  This isn't the first time I've heard of TI doing a half-ass job but it certainly is a problem that will be rectified with new controllers from the company.

I'm just not sure these new machines are compelling enough, especially for the wait.

The Touch Bar is useful.  For all the time that I used a touch screen Windows-based Lenovo Flex 3, I never really found the touch screen completely useful.  The display housing would bounce at my finger pressure, and Lenovo has better hinges than most.  In tablet mode, it could be useful, but who wants a 5 pound, 14 inch tablet?

Microsoft continues to make waves with their Surface lines, but will they actually sell many?  I don't believe so.  For the artist, Wacom has been the name for a very long time.  Of course, that's like saying "No gets fired for buying Microsoft." and things have changed.

For most people, the tablet market is only for replacements now.  I wouldn't expect to see more powerful tablets because of the heat, and the weight for heat dissipation hardware.

If Apple had announced a touch screen-enabled display, I would have expected the MacBook Air and MacBook lines to go away immediately, and a lot of "Macs don't need touch screens" kinds of quotes to be dug up from the past.

So, do you need an updated MacBook Pro that isn't much different?  It may all come down to killer Touch Bar additions.

Thinking back to when I was a IRC channel operator and then, moderator for the world's largest Apple-related forums, I remember people building lists of unachievable things for Apple to do with their next revision of whatever machine was next.  They had to be big and powerful and slim and light--at the same time.  Oh, and they had to all be 12 inch laptop computers, similar to the one IBM Japan made for Apple.

Naturally, almost nothing came true because what they wanted wasn't realistic.  This time, the machines are good and powerful, and didn't have anything that anyone wanted, of course.  I gave up on the forums around 8 years ago (after iPhone arrived), although I made a cameo appearance as an Olympic torch bearer for 24 hours or so.  I didn't understand it, so I can't explain it to you.

Why are brand fanatics so--fanatical?

Update 2016.11.13: Got my hands on the new 13 inch MacBook Pro without Touch Bar.

The speakers on each side of the keyboard are, as they say, long overdue.  The track pad is !@#$ huge.  I can only think that the size of the track pad is to overcome the touch screen alternative.  My experience with the capable Lenovo Flex 3 14 inch tells me that touch screen is a good idea but even the best hinges have trouble keeping the display steady when you're poking it.  You can put it into a 14 inch tablet mode, which was seemingly heavy and hot.  The new, huge track pad may be a good idea, even if it looks odd.

I can't say that it is much more powerful.  These days feel like the days when Motorola was lucky to eek out an extra 66 MHz to the clock speed.  For the most part, all of the i5 processors are powerful enough to handle most jobs.  Handling video production is another matter.  My mid-2012 15.4 inch MacBook Pro with 2.6 GHz i7 struggles at times--at 100 degrees C.

I'd be happy to try one of the 15.4 inch models.  Certainly having a newer GPU would improve processing power when working on video.

Update 2016.11.23: Saw the Touch Bar-included MacBook Pro models, 13 and 15.4 inch.

There is a US$900 gap between the two sizes, especially since there is no Intel-only graphics 15.4 inch machine.  It's unfortunate that there is no room for better heat dispersion in the 13 inch model since it's so (increasingly) thin.  I'd be more than happy to have a thicker, small model to fit around US$1799.

The Touch Bar was usable, quick, and easy to understand for the function key replacements.  I suppose I should have tried to see if Final Cut Pro was installed to see the timeline enhancements in the Touch Bar.  Instead, I looked at the US$2399 of the 15.4 inch machine in front of me and considered that my mid-2012 machine was just fine.

ShopNBC, err, EVINE goes back to 2006 for computers

I was looking for a laptop computer for someone else.  I looked at one of the shopping channels just to see what they had.

I'm always amused that they cheat by not really being specific.  It's rare that they tell the display's actual specifications, such as the resolution or the graphics hardware behind it.  You can bet that 1366x768 is the 15.6 inch display's resolution and that it has the basic, integrated graphics hardware that is part of the CPU package.

As I've been annoyed in the past with tablet sales from the shopping channels, they're overcharging for laptop computers, as well.  I noticed a mid-2014 MacBook Pro Retina bundle was US$1100 extra for the lovely accessories.  Instead of paying US$1799.99 from various stores, you'll pay US$2899.99 from HSN.
 
What was really curious was an IBM ThinkPad T60.  Remember that IBM sold their PC business to Lenovo a few years ago.  You'll notice that the display has a 4:3 ratio rather than 16:9 (or even 16:10), as is typical today.  The processor is equally ancient--an Intel Core Duo T2500.  That was replaced with the Core 2 Duo a long, long time ago, and the latest are the Core M, the way Intel brands them.

Even more sadly amusing is that the price is US$214.99 for a refurbished machine from at least 8 years ago.  They should be selling it for just the US$16.99 shipping and handling--or maybe, they should be paying customers the price for taking it off their hands.

In the end, I saw many curious offers for people who can't get out to a real store or those who are not knowledgeable about companies such as Newegg, Micro Center, or even Best Buy.

Lytro Illum upsetting to some, bringing the future closer

I was just looking at another article on the Lytro Illum camera, where they put it into the hands of a few professionals to see what could happen.

What gets to me is the negative comments about the camera, its technology, and how they show the hidden fear of the unknown.

Are people so afraid to change?  If Nikon and Canon were to stop making cameras, would they fall apart?  (That reminds me of people who were panicking during a BlackBerry blackout.)

I'm still a bit skeptical about using the camera, but at least the Illum model is shaped like a camera.  I want to use one, and given that I'm moving to a nearby area and can be there in a couple of hours, I'd like to test one, if the company is willing.  They can go with me while I try it.

On display at a local store

I think it's selling for US$1599.99.  That doesn't sound horrible.  My Olympus D-300L was $US999.99 and my C-2500L was originally $1499.99, though I only paid $850 for it because it was an open box deal.  They were experimental, as far as I'm concerned.

I don't really do a lot of casual photography.  I generally do sports or business photos, but there are times when I try to take a walk and find something interesting to photograph.  Since I'm moving to another area of the country, to a place I've never lived, I should have plenty to photograph.  I might as well try something totally new, correct?

I'm sure I'll have a handy, conventional camera with me at all times.  When I was walking up and down San Francisco, California, I was using my Olympus E-5 and 14-35mm f/2.0 combination--something small, correct?  :-D  I also had my bag of goodies on my shoulder, including the Panasonic GH3.  Nothing was light that day and I was dragging by the time I returned to the motel.

So, it might be good to go light, especially if I'm in a somewhat difficult environment.

What the Lytro people are doing is nothing short of amazing.  They're collecting a massive amount of information to allow the photograph to be re-constructed.  Of course, this can't be done with some Adobe product at this time.  They're still having trouble with FujiFilm's X-Trans sensors.

Next month, I will have moved and will be close to the San Fran Bay Area, so I could be at the Lytro headquarters in Mountain View (I think), to see what they're doing, and hopefully, they'll agree to a visit and a trial.

Update 2014.05.23: I've seen plenty of fearful comments about mirror-less cameras, also.  It seems that those who really don't know photography that well are afraid and speaking out about it.  I rarely see professionals who are afraid to try new equipment.  They may not like it, but they're willing to try it.  Wedding photographers seem to be the most resistant of professionals but I understand that.  When you have a whole wedding party yelling at you, you've got to deliver what they want, no matter what it is.  I've been asked to do two weddings and I wouldn't even consider photographing them.  I would do things my way, and that would not be the correct way.

I'm still wondering what all these hobbyists are going to do when they have no choice but to change.

If you've seen a Star Trek series, you've probably seen a holo-imager--a camera that apparently goes beyond 3D capture.  I see Lytro's technology as a start to get to such devices.

Update 2014.12.11: It was interesting to see Intel advertising Lytro's technology as their own.  Do they have no shame?  It reminds me of all those early 80x86 processors with the divide errors that never happened.

Update 2015.11.19: I've seen the Lytro Illum available at about half the price.  I'm concerned about buying one because the company might not make it.  Without the computer-based software, how would it work?  Would I have to keep an old computer to use it?

Besides this, quite a while ago, Panasonic revealed a patent about multiple focus planes.  Today, there was a rumor that a few days from now, they'll be implementing the patent in the GX8 that I have.  What's more is that Olympus has been ready to do this in the E-M1 firmware, version 4.0, which is about to be released.

These are both simplistic versions that require several photos but the technology will be a decent compromise for 2015.  The Lytro technology will likely prevail 10 or 20 years from now, although I hope that it will be sooner.  As soon as mirror-less interchangeable lens cameras will be dominant, things can go further.

WWDC Monday: turning 2012 obsolete

We all know it's coming as soon as we buy something: it's turning obsolete as soon as it has been released.

A car depreciates the moment you sign the paperwork and drive off the lot.  An electronic gadget starts toward obsolescence the moment it arrives in the real world and can be bought.  Even humans and other living things start to decay after they're born--we live to die.

So, it's no mystery that once new laptop computers are revealed by Apple at WWDC on Monday, mine will be the previous generation.  Oh, no!

As I had said when Apple released the first MacBook Air, the company would develop all of their laptop computers in a similar form for the long term.  They've accomplished some of that but they're still holding on to an earlier type.  I suspect it won't be until 2014 when they cut all ties to past laptop computer designs that are still current at this moment.

More than that, they desperately need to replace the Mac Pro--the tower-encased work horse created for the most professional pursuits of creativity.  Will they still have Xeon processors?  These processors have kept the price abnormally high, but have kept the performance equally high.  Will they be replaced with simpler, 8 core i7 processors?

I believe they must.  Apple have been working toward more reasonable pricing lately.  No, they aren't going into budget-class territory.  There is no reason to fight for the bottom end.  However, they can bring more power at a lower price.

Intel boasts the Haswell series of Core i processors as being less needy for power.  Certainly, whole systems seem too needy, especially when it comes to graphics hardware.  We've gone from 300 watt power supplies to much more than 650 watt requirements for many middle class graphics cards fit to a system.  As the CPU becomes less thirsty, will the GPU just soak up the rest?

When the various Macs were using G4 processors, they needed very little energy to survive, in contrast to the Pentium 4.  Even the PowerPC G5 wasn't incredibly ravenous.  It would be good to see a laptop computer that supposedly can last 7 hours on battery last more than 12.

I was reading something about nVidia's 600 series GPUs being re-badged with higher numbers for 2013.  Whatever Apple decides to use, I'm sure they'll be somewhat more powerful, but careful to conserve battery life.  The 650M graphics hardware in my machine can drain the battery so much faster than the Intel HD 4000 hardware, but then, there is so much difference in performance.  The HD 4000 uses less juice, but is it nearly as efficient?  I'd think it isn't.  Intel bought a third rate graphics hardware company to "help" the industry and they haven't really made a lot of progress with it.  It's still quite laughable.  How AMD/ATI and nVidia continue to dominate without tripping over the patents of each other is amazing.

So, when Monday afternoon (GMT-4) arrives at 13:00, will I cringe that my computer has suddenly shifted into the past?  No, it's quite powerful and will be after any announcement.  It's all perspective, of course.  If you live for tomorrow, you'll miss today.

I've seen the details now and I suspect that my MacBook Pro is safe--there was no replacement today.  The MacBook Air people should be feeling the strain, as those machines were given the newest Ultra Low Voltage (ULV) Haswell processors.  The battery life on the bigger machine has improved to a rated 12 hours.  It's not as good as I would have expected but it's very good.  Once the new (Mac) OS X arrives in autumn, that should help also.

 Speaking of which, OS X Mavericks is the first Apple operating system to make me smile for a while.  They've actually been working on the functionality, instead of spending most of their time on eye candy.

Virtual Memory has long been a problem for Mac OS X.  Considering that Mac OS X has had its roots in the Mach (micro-)kernel project and BSD UNIX, it's a wonder that Virtual Memory would have ever been a problem.  The various BSD-based operating systems (OpenBSD, FreeBSD, NetBSD) have been really stable.

Apple, in their infinite wisdom, thought that they could fix the world with an enhancement and it's been hell ever since.  I used to be a PowerMac user with the fastest (Ultra) SCSI hard drives and the virtual memory swapping was always at the wrong time.  I suppose for most people using a web browser and e-mail client, it wasn't a problem.  However, I've been at the edge of free memory far too often--even on my newest machine with 16 GB of RAM.

I'm hoping that this new Memory Compression technique will put things right.  It says a lot about processor power when they can do such a thing.  Back when the Motorola 68000 series processors were new, virtual memory was something only big business machines would do.  Motorola came out with an add-on that allowed virtual memory, but when you consider how slow all of the components were, it was much better to limit memory space to available RAM--16 MB or 4 GB.  Of course, the 16 MB limit of the 68000 was rarely used.  It was more likely restricted to 4 MB by an artificial limit.

Replacing the networking hardware was an expected change, as they were a bit behind the times already.  It's not that everyone has been running to stores to find 802.11ac (Gigabit WiFi) equipment, but the major vendors already have it out there.

In any case, Apple are finally pushing toward the future again, having put it on pause earlier.

Update 2013.07.21: Apple are in the middle of a Back-to-School clearance, so there is no new iPhone, iPod touch, Mac Book Pro, etc. until supplies are exhausted.  I suppose it's good for all involved but once a year changes aren't really enough to keep up with other companies.  I thought that Apple were trying to be more flexible.  Hopefully, they'll also have enough displays for a high density iPad mini, but I wouldn't bet on anything, given all the delays.

A new computer

Okay, so it's kewl to hate Apple.  I'm not an Apple fanatic anyway.  The fanatics drive me crazy.  I like the company's products, but don't own a huge number of them.

I've had Apple computers since 1993 when my IBM L40SX' mouse port died and they'd have to replace the motherboard to fix the problem.  The company gave me almost $1000 for a two year old computer that originally cost me $1500, and sent me on my way.

I took a friend and went to the local OfficeMax.  They had an Apple Performa 426 (LC/Performa 425 with a 250 MB hard drive).  Yes, Performa was the budget line and for around $1500, you got a keyboard without the keypad, a mouse, and a 14 inch 640x480 monitor.  It was a good deal, especially when the Quadra version of the same machine was more expensive (having the 68040 with inbuilt math coprocessor, instead lf the 68LC040) but lacked the keyboard and monitor.  I'm thinking that the keyboard and mouse were included in the LC425 version.

19 years ago, the company was okay, but their operating system was craptacular in fundamental ways, i.e., it needed to be scrapped.  Today, they have a good operating system that has some weird issues and they're trying to make it more mobile--like handheld devices mobile.  Is something with a 15.4 inch display a mobile device, really?

At this moment, I'm transferring my data from a backup of my current mid-2009 white MacBook to a mid-2012 aluminium MacBook Pro.  I'm thinking that I should have bought a USB 3.0 drive instead of saving a bit of money on the clearance item, as USB 2.0 isn't so fast.  The previous time I did a migration, it was over a Gigabit Ethernet connection from my late 2004 PowerBook G4 to the white MacBook.  I regretted not having a machine with discrete graphics but the nVidia 9400M graphics hardware was fast and with almost 5 years of technology between the two machines, the games I had ran very well on the MacBook.

This new machine has current graphics hardware: nVidia 650M with 1 GB of GDDR5 RAM.  That's fairly extreme for a notebook computer.  These days, desktop graphics hardware requires significant power, so it's nice to see that they can give good abilities to a mobile computer that doesn't require a long extension cord to do anything.  For daily uses, it's got the Intel HD 4000 graphics chipset, which is, ummm, less underwhelming than the HD 3000 chipset.  That's as generous as I can be.  I expect that Fishlabs' Galaxy on Fire 2 HD will run fine at 1440x900, rather than the 1024x600 window it uses on the MacBook.  However, I suspect UT2004 won't run at all, due to deprecated (retired) software in Lion/Mountain Lion.

Yesterday, I took the old PowerBook to have the backlight repaired.  The machine is a pleasant design and doesn't give any feeling of being cheap but it's not a unibody design.  Neither is the MacBook I have a unibody design, though it doesn't feel expensive or cheap.  Certainly, remembering the late iBook family sitting in a store with half its keys missing is enough to make you think that any of the MacBook family are not cheap.  However, this certain MacBook Pro is the aluminium slab unibody machine, and it felt very impressive pulling it out of the box.  It should be interesting to compare the two side-by-side.  Notably though, the 1440x900 vs 1280x854 display resolution and graphics hardware are the biggest details.  Considering that the 1280x854 15.2 inch widescreen display arrived in 2001 when most of the world offered a 1024x768 4:3 display is still amazing.  Of course, you pay extra for the better, higher resolution display and back then, Apple didn't have the sales numbers to push down the cost of the display with economies of scale.

I'm interested in how I'll function with Lion or Mountain Lion.  I didn't get far enough to find out which it has, but the entry on the Apple store said that it qualified for the up-to-date program.  I'm all for massive security improvements, as Apple has lagged the industry, even when the security improvements were free and available to them.  I can't understand the need to suck people into their world without protecting them.

The operating system(s) is much different than Snow Leopard from what I've seen.  A lot of it seems to be superficial eye candy, which doesn't do a thing for me, if the system is still broken when you use it.  e.g., I have a problem when I'm not a System Administrator in Snow Leopard.  I'll go from my default of the Applications folder to one of my photo folders, the Utilities folder, or some such.  The Back button should be enabled and light up with a visual cue to let you know that you can click it to return to the previous folder.  Nine of ten times, it does not, and clicking the button does zero.  I'm sure it's someone else's fault because Apple never makes mistakes.  Did your sarcasm detector just jump to 100 %?

I have about 2 hours, 21 minutes at latest count until the Migration Assistant finishes.  The good thing is that this machine is not tied down since it's all being pulled from the Time Machine backup.  It's odd watching the latest thermometer/progress bar work.  It has sharp edges--no rounded rectangle there, but it still has the fluid effects and the ever-present blue.

Hopefully, it will handle my Phase One Capture One 7 Pro software well.  If not, after the 16 GB RAM switch, it'll be even better.  I'm being hampered by only 6 GB of RAM, and the system is often at a crawl.  Isn't that crazy that so much RAM isn't enough?  I'll find out in a couple of hours.  Hopefully, it'll be a wonderful experience.  I mean, it's Apple, yes?  Nothing could ever be wrong.  Yes, yes, there goes your sarcasm detector again.

It took about 3 hours for the Migration Assistant to finish.  That's not terrible, but it missed a few settings or, I guess, they didn't apply correctly for Mac OS X 10.8.  Just after that, I went to the shop where they're going to repair my PowerBook and used their internet connection to download 1.32 GB of updates to the operating system and other Apple-related software.  When it wanted to restart, I clicked Restart (as opposed to Not Now) but it didn't seem to work.  It was only much later, when I went back to the merged Software Update/Mac App Store that it updated correctly.  It's confusing.  As of midnight, the machine seems to be working reasonably well.  I can't keep a Finder window but other things seem to be working, including my Capture One 7 Pro.  That's a good thing.

Continuing, all of my updates have been processed, and I replaced the 8 GB of RAM with 16 GB.  The combined Mac App Store/Software Update found a tiny update for MacBook Pro and MacBook Air.  It's been out a couple of weeks, so I'm surprised that it wasn't found already.

Of course, the 16 GB of RAM makes the re-launch of almost any application instantaneous.   However, Capture One 7 Pro still lags when loading more than 1200 photos (and their associated change information) in one folder.  The 5400 rpm drive has a lot to do with that, but of course, 1200+ photos are quite a lot.  I started out with over 2100.  The drive really does feel abnormally slow when I've been using a 7200 rpm drive for about 1 year but limited there to 6 GB of RAM. 

In the standard user account where I have my photography, it mostly remembers my Finder window.  In my administrator account, it almost never does.  Of course, this is 10.8.2 and I'm not comfortable until any release gets to 10.x.4.  Apple just don't figure out things correctly until around that time.  I'm concerned about sync-ing my iPhone with iTunes 11.  I can appreciate the enhanced user experience, but iTunes is generally flaky until the second patch, but they've been stopping at the first and releasing something new after that.  I don't want the data on my phone scrambled.

I'm not saying that anything is unusable.  It's just not as good as it should be, and things are moved around, probably for the sake of moving things, like with Software Update.  Be sure to click on "more" at the end of the description, so you can see the whole list of updates and choose which you would like.