May 15, 2007 7:57 AM PDT

Apple releases new MacBook laptops

Apple announced on Tuesday that it has updated its MacBook laptops with faster processors, more memory and more hard-drive space.

The new laptops are now available from Apple retail stores, product resellers and the company's online store.

The new consumer laptops, all of which are an inch thick and have a 13.3-inch display with 1280x800-pixel wide-screen resolution, are available in three models: white with the option of 2GHz or 2.16GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processors, or black with the faster processor.

All three models are equipped with 1GB of RAM that can be expanded to 2GB of RAM. They also have built-in iSight video cameras, AirPort Extreme wireless cards capable of 802.11n wireless networking, two USB 2.0 ports and one FireWire port.

The lower-end white MacBook, with a starting price of $1,099, comes with an 80GB hard drive; its 2.16GHz counterpart, which has a 120GB hard drive and a faster, double-layer support 8x SuperDrive DVD drive, costs $1,299. The black MacBook, identical to the faster white MacBook except for the color and a beefed-up 160GB hard drive, is priced at $1,499.

Apple also manufactures higher-end MacBook Pro laptops, which did not receive updates this week.

As reported on CNET's Crave blog on Monday morning, the new MacBooks do not include several features rumored to be included in their next iterations. Among those features are Intel "Santa Rosa" processors, solid-state hard drives and LED-backlit displays.

See more CNET content tagged:
Apple MacBook, Apple Computer, laptop computer, hard drive

62 comments

Join the conversation!
Add your comment
I love Mac because....
I love Mac because it comes with "faster professor"...
Posted by kk_junk (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
professor...lol
Good catch. I read it as processor.
Posted by psedog (40 comments )
Link Flag
I love MacBooks because....
The OS is acctually good, it don't freeze or crash like Windows does all the time. Ya, it don't matter, 98, 2000, XP, Vista, it's all garbage, I never had a good experiance with Windows.

I can't really afford to buy a laptop, any laptop, but I still have my G5 Power Mac that I got a year ago, and it's my best computer ever!!! and keep in mind that I have used computers since the first one that I had, which was an IBM PC Jr.

I also like the Sun Workstation with the dual 64bit processors and their ability to have up to 32GB of ram. My G5 has 16GIG of ram and it's a dream machine, so I can imagine how much more you can do with 32 if you need it.
Posted by RompStar_420 (772 comments )
Reply Link Flag
I love Dell Insipiron because...
1. It's cheap and powerful
2. It's light and cool
3. Stable as a rock with Windows Defender and Norton installed
4. Looks pretty sexy too
5. Lots of programs available - many for free
6. Plenty of upgrade options from different vendors
7. Dell is the shizzle

My friend has a fancy Macbook. Other then being heavy enough to use in the gym, it feels like resting a portable heater on your knees. Firefox crashes every minute on it - how's that even possible? I knew all that BS about Mac's fabled stability was just BS.
Posted by godam_registration (113 comments )
Link Flag
The Best Just Got Better... Except VRAM
believe that the macbook is the best laptop in terms of a 'best
value-basis.' Unfortunately, I don't think that the CPU was most
in need of an upgrade; it was the VRAM. The low, shared VRAM
remains a significant limiting factor on its performance. I
believe that Apple would have done very well if it gave the black
macbook the optional 128MB of shared VRAM. That would give
the high-end macbook a much greater appeal to buyers. It also
would not compromise the sales of its lower-end pro version,
which would have the dedicated VRAM and other features.

The Macbook's processor and RAM are high enough to run
sophisticated software, but the 64MB of VRAM is very low
compared with other laptops priced for under $1000. I think
Apple needs to upgrade that video ram so that the macbook
could outclass every other laptop for the future.
Posted by Battleshipagincourt (14 comments )
Reply Link Flag
I have to agree
That is the one thing that has kept me at bay when it comes to
purchasing a Macbook. I personally like the smaller size of the
Macbook when compared to the MBP, but the video is lackluster,
and sharing VRAM is never fun.

I would like to see a 13" or 12" MBP. Not all this 15" crap. And a 17"
laptop?! That's what my iMac is for. And it's about as portable.
Posted by jelloburn (252 comments )
Link Flag
A Web Developer's Dream Come True.
I'm getting one to run Vista Ultimate & OS X.

Best of both worlds. I think so.
Posted by ServedUp (413 comments )
Reply Link Flag
New Macbooks... Lackbooks?
Santa Rosa, Vini vidi vici, ay ay ay...

Where is the glory in this new release? Where is the glory?

The new macbooks aren't up to par for me, they are better to be sure, but still don't offer the panache that most crave leopard and state of the art. These are in-betweenners, and i look forward to their next release... already.
Posted by ThunkDifferent.com (5 comments )
Reply Link Flag
GREAT
Can wait to get it so I can put Vista Ultimate on it and wipe off OS X.
Posted by jase1125 (18 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Wipe off
Enjoy... great use for your money. It's not like you bought OS X separately. You bought or will buy Vista for it.. right?
Posted by kool_skatkat (982 comments )
Link Flag
....
you a masochist or what?
Posted by henk goewie (7 comments )
Link Flag
Why is VRAM such an issue?
The Macbook is not a Macbook Pro. Granted, I'd like to see a smaller Macbook Pro, but I doubt it's going to happen anytime soon.

That said, the GMA 950 uses much LESS power than ATI/nVidia's offerings for a simple graphics chip--I think this is where Apple squeezes 6hrs out of the battery (your mileage may vary) on the Macbook vs. 5hrs out of the Macbook Pro.

To me, battery life is far-and-above more important than graphics performance.

Some of my friends argue that I can't do adequate gaming on it....I say that's what my Xbox 360 is for, but I've managed to play the original Call of Duty on my Blackbook (C2D 2.0Ghz/1GB RAM) under Rosetta and it's pretty quick.
Posted by close5828 (230 comments )
Reply Link Flag
It's an issue because...
the VRAM is shared, so it takes away from your system's total
RAM. This isn't a big issue when you're running on 2 GB, but
when you're working with 1 GB, and you're working within two or
three CS apps, it becomes an issue.

If you're working with any 3d, then it can really become an issue.
Everything from Photoshop to Final Cut uses your video card and
when the VRAM is being shared, it doesn't bode well for your
overall performance. That, and 64 MB of VRAM isn't enough in
the first place and needs to be upgraded.

I understand that the Macbook isn't meant to be a power house
(that's what the MBP is for), but the lackluster integrated video
hampers a nice, well though out system. Users of Macbooks are
more than likely not creative professionals, but I can almost
guarantee that they are gamers to some extent, and providing a
video chipset that will stand up for more than a year would be a
nice gesture by Apple.
Posted by jelloburn (252 comments )
Link Flag
It's not an issue now, but what about later?
I don't consider the limited VRAM a problem, but 64MB of
shared memory is definitely on the low side. I would
complement Apple for building computers that last long after
they become obsolete; but why not design them to keep up with
technology a few years from now?

I recently bought a refurbished imac rather than a faster, and
cheaper, macbook solely because of the 128MB VRAM. I think
Apple could boost its sales of macbooks much further by
increasing the shared VRAM to 128 MB. It would not affect
battery life that much, but could expand what the computer can
do. It would detract from sales of the pro, but it would also
detract from the competitors. If 64MB is 'pretty quick,' imagine
what 128MB would mean.
Posted by Battleshipagincourt (14 comments )
Link Flag
VRAM matters...
because other manufacturers offer more than just integrated crap from Intel on their low end laptops and desktops. except apple who charges a leg and an arm for a computer.
i have an ibook with 32mb vram and it's so slow when i do quicktime encoding on it. i don't feel like upgrading to a new mac with the prices and minimal graphics options.
Posted by wayland.ind (20 comments )
Link Flag
Hahaha...Apple losers crack me up!
Who cares what Apple is doing. Microsoft makes more money in 2 weeks than Apple does all year. Just another crap products from a Fruit company. Woo look, I have a new icon that glows!!!!!!

WHO CARES!
Posted by iZune (58 comments )
Reply Link Flag
At least Apple works...
Which is much less than I can say for windows.
Posted by ral1288 (1 comment )
Link Flag
Do the math iZune...
While I'm fairly sure you rarely let facts inform your opinions
iZune, for others who may be interested...

Microsoft - Fortune 500 #49
- 44.282 Billion turnover for 11% increase
- 3% profit increase per annum with profits of 12.599 Billion
- market value of 274.4 Billion
- earnings per share $1.20

Apple - Fortune 500 #121
- 19.315 Billion Turnover with 39% increase
- 50% profit increase per annum with profits of 1.989 Billion
- market value of 80.6 Billion
- earnings per share $2.27

So in terms of nominal profits your statement should read "
Microsoft make more money in 2 *months* blah blah blah..."

Who cares what Apple is doing? Any analyst worth their salary
should care about a 80 Bill market cap company increasing
profits by 50% per annum...

I know which one I'd rather have shares in, and that's not just
after using Vista...

Enjoy your Zune... I'll stick with my iPod
Posted by papastanley (9 comments )
Link Flag
Funny?
You actually paid to use Windows? Now that's funny!
Posted by cgpublic (12 comments )
Link Flag
Woo look,
I have a new OS that took me 5 years to develop that does nothing more than waste energy and take up VRAM, RAM, and CPU to show open windows in a different way. Oh wait, it also has 'upgraded' security which is getting closer to not sucking, but still does not quite make it to the level of a 'crap product'.
Posted by bobmarksdale (29 comments )
Link Flag
Is This Guy Serious
I've read other comments from this guy. All he seems to do is say
that any mac products is crap no matter what it is (He said that
Final Cut was crap, I know weird?). So I think that us people who
have actually realised that there are better alternatives to the
dismal product should just let him enjoy using his Zune and
squirting songs to no one cause he is just about the only person
who owns one.
Posted by mac_is_ultimate (1 comment )
Link Flag
Glad "Apple loser"
I've been a glad "Apple loser" for many years and I'm happy more
and more people 'get the glow'. !0% of the laptop-users by now. So
Talkback, keep on sending your scared and misinformed views. If
that's all the Microsoft-side has to offer you just have given us
another reason to choose Apple!
Posted by macspertise (3 comments )
Link Flag
Microsoft Nitwits Unite!
Sounds like this guy has a problem with money. Who cared how much Microsoft makes? Windows remains a crappy piece of work--still crashes, still doesn't work properly, still is attacked by mass quantities of worms, viruses, and other assorted trash. Basic functions in any number of basic Windows applications just do not work reliably--often you click on some icon or button or tool, and, lo & behold, it doesn't work. I had Windows XP running on one desktop computer, most of the time you had to hit 'Shut Down' twice before the OS would react to the command. Twice?! What is that about???!! Trashy stuff. It's laughable.
Posted by tramky (33 comments )
Link Flag
MS scared
So why is MS so scared of Open Source?
Posted by kool_skatkat (982 comments )
Link Flag
Numbers
"Microsoft makes more money in 2 weeks than Apple does all
year"

-that might have been true a few years ago, but that is no longer
the case. Microsoft's net income was only 6 times that of Apple
in 2006 (as opposed to 26 which is what you are implying).
While that is still a huge number, the ratio has been rapidly
falling for the last two years. Apple's earnings have been
climbing dramatically whereas MSFTs have shown almost no
change in years. That is until Vista was released. MSFT's
earnings did trend upward for the one quarter for which there
are results, but the change is not comparable to the huge and so
far sustained quarter to quarter growth in Apple's profits.
Posted by Mystigo (183 comments )
Link Flag
Apple
In 1974 General Motors dominated the auto industry. They laughed at the Japanese automakers cars and said they made more money than all of them combined. Flash forward a few years. Toyota passes GM because they (build the cars for the customer) not build a car and then look for customers. Apple has the same mentality. Build things for the customer. Working at a large coorporation with PCs they caught a nasty virus this year and took down our servers and all of our PCs. Had to get Nortons to give us a new softeare version to contain the virus. While they were working on this I pulled out my Mac and used it to perform my job functions till all my PC brothers got over the flu. Thats what A Mac is for. In 1974 I was with my father in a large Sears store and heard the manager state that Sears is #1. Where are they now? Sure Microsofty makes a lot of money. And they need to Fix or Repair Daily to keep running. An old proverb for you. What comes around goes around. Keep building crap and somebody will build something better. So far Mac has left windows in the dust. Just more lemmings who don't know good from bad because they haven't tasted or used the good. POOR LEMMINGS!
Posted by raymichael (2 comments )
Link Flag
best OS, best hardware.
apple losers? this from a guy with no imagination? iZune? the impersonator? can't think of a better name? how about duh-Zune? quality not quantity. think, and thinkdifferent
Posted by ed9 (4 comments )
Reply Link Flag
macs are overpriced and browsers don't work
i used to be a mac user for a decade until 2002 when i finally got fed up with the browsers not working with so many shopping websites i use all the time. i can't afford to mess up a transaction because of browser incompatibility!

my fiance is now forced to use macs at work and she constantly encounters problem with their intranet on mac browsers as well as vendors she deals with. firefox is NOT the solution on the mac, it crashes every 15 minutes!

mac os is fun and the computers are stylish, but when it comes to important everyday work, it just doesn't cut it.
Posted by birdguynews (13 comments )
Reply Link Flag
yeah...
I know Firefox crashes ALL the time on my Mac... please...

I very rarely come across websites that don't work in Safari, and if I
do, I use Firefox, which works perfectly.

I love the BS stories people post to try and sway opinions.
Posted by jelloburn (252 comments )
Link Flag
2002???
so we have had no updates/improvements since 2002???

Why post a message in 2007 about how it sucked for you in 2002...this is the IT industry, next week these posts are out-of-date...

Macbook Pro...Firefox...NeoOffice...GIMP...VLC...all sweet
Posted by dateman (9 comments )
Link Flag
FUD
I've used Firefox on my Mac, I haven't had a crash. If you were
smart, you'd use the updated build of WebKit from the WebKit.org
site. It works a lot better than the latest Apple release of Safari. I
haven't run into too many sites that Safari can't handle. That's
funny, on my local network, the Macs are the ones that give me the
least amount of trouble. You sound more like a PC cheerleader
than a Mac user.
Posted by mhersh (78 comments )
Link Flag
Macs are behind the times, yet again...
Dell, Lenovo, Toshiba, Sony, etc., have all released "Santa Rosa" / Centrino Pro laptops, while crybaby MacFans try to justify their overpriced, outdated clunkers. Go figure.
Posted by mbenedict (1001 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Wrong
You are missing a very important point. It does not matter how much cpu you put on a Windows machine it will always be slow. Not true with the Mac X. I got tired of PC an moved to the mac for that reason. After a couple of weeks ,a Vista machine will feel like if you were running a 386.

I am glad people like you keep buying pc. Your are made for each other.
Posted by yacahuma (530 comments )
Link Flag
Sony has Santa Rosa??? Not yet...
"Dell, Lenovo, Toshiba, Sony, etc., have all released "Santa Rosa" / Centrino Pro laptops, while crybaby MacFans try to justify their overpriced, outdated clunkers. Go figure."

Hmmm... Let's go to Sony.com. Click on their SZ series. Santa Rosa... nope. If you look through Sony's website not one laptop uses the T7100,T7300,... chipset. Apple already had N wifi six months ago. If you don't have the 800Mhz front side bus based CPUs than who cares. Furthermore, take a direct head to head with Sony's C Series and Apple's Macbook's. Apple's laptops have slightly smaller HDDs, but they use far better CPUs (T7200/T7400 compared to T5500s) plus they already have 802.11N. If you consider the cost of an 802.11 wifi adapter alone you will find that the Macbook is a much better deal than Sony's C Series. Sony is supposed to unveil a new line with the new Santa Rosa based CPU, but until then you are blowing smoke at least citing Sony. I will agree with you that they are a bit pricey although I don't think I would call them outdated. I can't say that I have seen anything that beat the Macbook in every category for every price. That being said I think most people would prefer an 800Mhz FSB as opposed to the overrated 1.3MP isight. Sure, the camera has a retail value of a about $100, but unless you are going to be a youtube junkie I think most people would prefer to spend the $100 on the CPU or the RAM or the HDD.
Posted by BigGuns149 (790 comments )
Link Flag
Be nice, Give Macs time...
In a couple of years, they may even be up to today's standards for the industry in laptops.

Unfortunately the rest of the world will have moved on and they'll still be behind, but they are catching up.

2Gb of memory max! Coolness! My three year old Toshiba Portege M200 can do that. The current Portege runs 4Gb.

Give them time to catch up. They will eventually if the rest of the industry stops long enough and waits.
Posted by Vegaman_Dan (6683 comments )
Link Flag
Be nice, Give Macs time...
In a couple of years, they may even be up to today's standards for the industry in laptops.

Unfortunately the rest of the world will have moved on and they'll still be behind, but they are catching up.

2Gb of memory max! Coolness! My three year old Toshiba Portege M200 can do that. The current Portege runs 4Gb.

Give them time to catch up. They will eventually if the rest of the industry stops long enough and waits.
Posted by Vegaman_Dan (6683 comments )
Link Flag
At least I got chicken!
Macbooks are behind times, way over-priced, and don't run the latest Windows games like the $700 PC laptop does.
Posted by Leeeroy Jenkins (9 comments )
Reply Link Flag
thanks
many thanks for the valuable information
----------------------------------------
iPhone Converter
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.iphoneconverter.com/" target="_newWindow">http://www.iphoneconverter.com/</a>
Posted by ayneadams (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
An "oldgrade" - way behind the competition
It's no wonder Apple decided to remove "Computer" from the comany name. They just aren't competitive in that area.
Posted by john55440 (1020 comments )
Reply Link Flag
 

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

What's Hot

Discussions

Shared

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.