Macworld 2006

As is typically the case, Steve Jobs' Macworld announcements did not live up to all of the hype and speculation that had been floating around over the past few months. This doesn't mean that the revelations were flawed, but it does show that Apple's practice of keeping everything a secret and stoking the hype is bound to lead to disappointment. At some point, they may run the risk of coming across as underdelivering because they're not managing expectations prior to these events.

Anyway, the substance of the speech focused on key software enhancements to iLife and (to a lesser extent) iWork, followed by the announcement of the first Intel-powered Macs. The software stuff looks interesting and I haven't had a chance to really dig into it yet and dissect it, but by all accounts it seems like Apple is continuing to innovate and make it easy for people to manage their digital content and push it around in all kinds of formats (on the web, in printed books, on DVDs, etc.).

The Intel announcement was the big one for most people. Since Apple announced their intention to switch to Intel processors back in June, speculation has been rampant over if and how this switch would effect the overall Mac experience. Would Macs become less "Mac-like" and more like PCs? Initial impressions seem to point to a clear "no": it seems as though the Intel Macs will continue to be every bit "Macs"- although there are a few details relating to the specs of the first laptops out the door that are disappointing.

In my opinion, here are the "Mac-like" attributes that I was most concerned about losing in the transition, and which appear to have survived more or less intact:

Identical software experience on the Intel platform- everything looks the same and performs the same. Most accounts indicate that this is the case. There is some speculation about how some media software (such as programs that use QuickTime to play back video) will perform on the Intel platform, since those programs were heavily optimized to use the PowerPC's vector-based Altivec processing engine, which is absent from the PC. In other words, the PPC had a kind of "turbo" mode that greatly accelerated certain types of applications, and without a direct corollary on the Intel side, it's unclear if the media experience on Intel will be on par (or better). There is a partial analog to Altivec on the Intel side (SSE), so if initial impressions are that media performance is a little bit slower, perhaps as media apps continue to optimize for SSE, things will improve. But, overall and with this one caveat, the software experience seems to be intact.

Advanced pre-OS system configuration environment- PPC Macs had firmware (OpenFirmware) that was very advanced and provided some intelligent early stage boot functionality for Macs that PCs (most of which use a traditional, legacy BIOS system) don't have. The Intel Macs are using EFI, a next-generation BIOS replacement from Intel, that appears to provide similar functionality to OpenFirmware and compatibility with existing Mac pre-boot utilities (such as their firmware password protection). Bottom line: Intel Macs continue to have an advanced early boot environment that is superior to BIOS, and that's great news.

FireWire target mode- related to the early boot experience. PPC Macs have a tremendously useful feature where the user can plug a Mac into another Mac via FireWire and boot one of the Macs up as a hard drive. This feature is still supported. Fantastic.

Really, really fast sleep and resume from sleep- not 100% sure if the Intel Macs sleep and wake up as quickly as the PPC Macs did, but preliminary reports indicate that they do.

Off the top of my head, those details- while not really big deals in the grand scheme of things- represent some of the subtle fit and finish that differentiated Macs from PCs, and it's really nice to see that they're still there.

On the other hand, there are some more mundane technical specs relating to the MacBook Pro (hate the name) that are inferior to the current generation of PPC PowerBooks- and it is troubling to see that the first Intel laptop is not a superset of the current generation. Specifically:

PPC PowerBooks have dual-layer DVD burners, while the MacBook Pros don't (they've only got single layer burners). I don't think the lack of this feature has anything to do with Intel per-se, but it's definitely a conspicuous step backward. For video professionals, dual-layer DVD support is becoming essential.

PPC PowerBooks have a FireWire 800 port- MacBook Pros don't. Not sure what the future of FW 800 is- perhaps it's being canned- but this is another example of a feature the PowerBooks have that the MacBook Pros don't.

MacBook Pros don't have internal modems. To me, this is not a big deal, and I view it as another example of Apple "innovating" by removing a piece of legacy hardware, just as they did with floppy disk drives. There's a balance between providing a completely compatible machine that is in some ways held prisoner by its need to remain compatible (which I would refer to as the Windows/PC way of thinking) and by continuing to advance the platform by adding new features and retaining only the most critical legacy functionality (the Mac way). Most people don't need modems- for those who do, Apple provides an external USB modem. To keep their laptops as efficient, light, and powerful as possible, Apple needs to excise parts that are not absolutely essential, and out of everything that could have been cut, I think the modem makes perfect sense.

MacBook Pros lack an S-Video out port. PowerBooks have one. For video professionals, S-Video is really nice to have, because there are situations where you may need to output the video from your computer to a video device that accepts S-Video but not conventional computer connections. I have not been able to determine if the MacBook Pro's DVI output port can send S-Video out through an adapter- but it doesn't seem like it. If this is the case, this is another pro video feature that will be sorely missed.

The bottom line with the MacBook Pro: most of the features that it's missing are those that helped differentiate the PowerBook as a video professional's mobile workstation. Without dual-layer burners, FW800, and S-Video, the MacBook Pro is not ideal for that use. If this exact same laptop were positioned as a replacement for the iBook, however, it would be a complete superset and a really nice upgrade. But as a replacement for the PowerBook, it comes up short.

Rumblings on the web are that there are a number of additional Intel-based Macs that are nearly ready to be released, but were held back from the keynote because of supply issues with the Intel Core Duo chips. Who knows if this is true, but I strongly suspect that this first MacBook Pro (and the new iMac) are the least impressive of the new Intel machines, and it's unfortunate that they represent the public's first impression of the next generation of Macs.