If we’re going to talk about this year’s show, we’ve got to talk about the new hardware firstYears from now, all we’ll remember MWSF 2006 for is the introduction of Intel-based Macs, the first Intel-based computers in Apple’s 30-year history.
Sure, I预料到的Apple wouldn’t yet announce Intel Macs at MWSF, but I wasn’t surprised that they didMy main reason for thinking they wouldn’t do so yet is that they’d catch too many third-party developers while they were still putting their universal-binary pants onBut Apple never promised any particular ship date, other than “before” this year’s WWDC, and the modern era Apple doesn’t exactly bend over backwards to please third-party developers.
So but what did surprise me is that both of the new Intel-based machines are using the existing enclosure designs.1I can’t recall a single previous instance when Apple switched to a new processor family without introducing new case designs, and the switch to Intel processors is as big a switch as they’ve ever made, certainly a bigger deal than, say, the switch from G3s to G4s, or G4s to G5s — all of which transitions coincided with the introduction of new case designs.
[更新：Apparently my recollection of the first batch of PowerPC Macs is just plain wrong; numerous readers have pointed out that the first three Power Macs — the 6100, 7100, and 8100 — used the same cases as the Quadra 610, 650, and 800/840AV, respectively.]
It hadn’t even crossed my mind that they might do this, introduce Intel-based Macs identical in outer appearance to existing PowerPC MacsI suspect many others had a similar blind spot: one reason no one predicted Intel-based iMacs for MWSF is that the iMac G5 got a refreshed case design just a few months priorIf you assumed, as I did, that Apple’s first Intel-based iMacs would ship with a new case design, you had to figure they’d be coming later in 2006, so as to give the still-new iMac G5 case a reasonable lifespan.
但事后看来，我认为我看到了苹果的战略Internally, these new computers are almost completely different than their PowerPC brethren; but by using the same outer appearance, it reinforces the message that this transition is intended to be smoothA shift, not a schism.
This is further reinforced by the fact that neither Intel-based Mac replaces any PowerPC models; both the iMac G5 and 15-inch PowerBook G4 are still for saleThis positions the Intel-based models more like siblings than successors.
If you have any sort of technical background in software, you probably understand that this transition is quite significantBut Apple’s message to consumers is, “It’s just a Mac with a faster processor.” Point being that the technical problems are for Apple and Mac developers to worry about, not Mac users.
Nevertheless, I expect to see next-generation cases for at least some of the Intel-based Macs to be released in the first half of this year.
该新的iMac有一个DVI端口and explicitly support spanning desktops with a secondary displayThis is the first time an iMac has had this feature.
Real-world benchmarks — as opposed to the utterly useless SPECmark benchmarks Apple is using promotionally — show that the iMac Core Duos are faster than iMac G5s, but not amazingly so.Macworld的基准peg them at about 25-50 percent faster when running native universal binary appsIt shouldn’t be surprising that the results aren’t more dramatic, because the G5 is a terrific processorI expect comparisons between the not-yet-released MacBook Pro and PowerBook G4 to be much more dramatic (although almost certainly far short of Apple’s claim of “4-5× faster).
User interface snappiness seems to be the most noticeable improvement, and has been mentioned by everyone I know who already has an iMac Core Duo.迈克尔蔡和丹本杰明both specifically mentioned that window resizing in particular is much improved.
罗塞塔的表现令人尊敬Macworld’s benchmarks peg it at about the speed of a 1 GHz G4 machine; not bad at all. Photoshop jockeys are going to want to wait until Adobe releases universal binaries before they buy Intel-based hardware, but for most users, including Microsoft Office users, this should be good enough.
The system software libraries, frameworks, and applications on the Intel-based Macs are universal binaries, but, the disk partition format is different than on PowerPC MacsFrom the updated通用二进制编程指南:
The standard disk partition format on an Intel-based Macintosh computer differs from the disk partition format of a PowerPC-based Macintosh computerIf your application depends on the partitioning details of the disk, it may not behave as expectedPartitioning details can affect tools that examine the hard disk at a low level.
By default, internal hard drives on Intel-based Macintosh computers use the GUID Partition Table (GPT) scheme and external drives use the Apple Partition Map (APM) partition schemeTo create an external USB or FireWire disk that can boot an Intel-based Macintosh computer, select the GPT disk partition scheme option using Apple Disk UtilityStarting up an Intel-based Macintosh using an APM disk is not supported.
As I read it, what this means is that for the time being, you cannot create an external hard drive that can boot both an Intel-based and PowerPC Mac.
The MacBook Pro isn’t shipping with a built-in modem, which has provoked some misguided ire from those who still use dial-up connectionsApple didn’t drop the built-in modem because they think没有人uses modems any more; they dropped it because few enough people do that it isn’t worth making every MacBook owner pay for oneJust like when Apple dropped floppy drives — it wasn’t as though the floppy was dead, it was just close enough to dead that it no longer deserved “built-in” status.
On the other end of the spectrum, the MacBook Pro is also missing the PowerBook G4’s FireWire 800 portAgain, I think this is a reasonable decisionMost people don’t use FireWire 800; those that do use FireWire 800 should soon be able to purchase FireWire 800 ExpressCards, which cards could conceivably offer二FireWire 800端口，据格伦·弗勒锡曼:
Apple vice president David Moody confirmed in a briefing this afternoon, that Apple thought the best way to provide performance and flexibility was not to include FireWire 800 as a fixed port on the models.
Instead, with 2 Gbps of bandwidth from the slot, an ExpressCard could, for instance, offer two simultaneous FireWire 800 ports that could run at full speedThis could support an extremely fast set of RAID 0 (striped) disks, for instance, with four disks being striped in an A, B, C, D fashion for a total throughput of 1.6 Gbps, limited only by the disks’ read and write speeds.
As for the MacBook Pro’s missing S-video out port, however — that just stinks[更新:苹果出售$19 DVI-to-Video adaptor, but it’s a nickel-and-dime move not to include it in the kit for a $2000 laptopThe difference here between S-video and the modem is that modems是dying — not dead yet but dying — but S-video output is needed frequently for presentations.]
Many people seem to be surprised by the prices, apparently under the misguided assumption that Intel = cheapE.g.: Robert Scoble’s son Patrick, whoexpected Intel-based Mac laptops to sell for $700（也许是Apple将release a $700 laptop — it’s not that far off from the iBook G4’s current $999 starting price — but if they do, it’s certainly not going to be an ass-kicker like the MacBook Pro.)
PCs typically cost less than Macs because they’re pieces of crap, not because Intel CPUs are less expensive than IBM’s or Freescale’s.
并且不要让我开始胡说八道本文, wherein BusinessWeek writer Arik Hesseldahl attempts to stir up some shit by casting Apple as a profiteerThe article is headlined “Is the New iMac a Cash Machine?”, with the sub-head: “Disassembling the first fruit of the Apple-Intel alliance raises some interesting questions about the model’s profit margins”Hesseldahl’s article hinges on an analysis by a firm named iSuppli, who took apart a $1299 iMac Core Duo and claim, judging from its components, that it costs Apple $898 to assemble.
我不是说他们的成本分析是错误的I’m saying that even if it is exactly right (but are they sure it isn’t$ 899?), there’s nothing scandalous about itFor one thing, Apple releases its gross margins in its quarterly financial reports为just-ended Q1 2006，Apple报告的利润率为27％Selling $1299 computers that cost them only $898 to produce would imply margins of around 31 percent令人震惊。
But worse, iSuppli’s cost analysis explicity excludes all software and packagingBy this logic, all of the software bundled on these machines, including the operating system, must have written itself. Worse still, at the end of the article, Hesseldahl gets around to mentioning that Apple almost certainly pays IBM far less for PowerPC processors than they pay Intel for Core Duos, clearly indicating that the $1299 iMac Core Duo is probably减profitable for Apple than the $1299 iMac G5.
The headline and opening paragraphs of the article are clearly construed to leave casual readers — andthose with poor reading comprehension skills— with the conclusion that Apple is profiting wildly from the switch to Intel processors, when the facts and analyst opinions in the article itself lead to the completely opposite conclusion.
除了通常的一轮bug修复, Mac OS X 10.4.4 contains some noticeable new software: a slew of new and rewritten Dashboard Widgets.
新的白页小部件People是我的最爱I’ve wanted it ever since I realized that the original PhoneBook widget — now rechristened “Business” — could only be used to look up business listings.
The new Address Book widget looks better, but I use Quicksilver for on-the-fly Address Book lookups so I’ll never use it.
The ESPN widget looks good, but you have to open multiple instances to track multiple sportsThis seems to fit “the Dashboard way”, howeverI probably would have loved this widget back when I followed college basketball religiously.
Google小部件让我觉得完全没用How could it possibly be easier to switch to Dashboard mode and enter your query in the widget than to just switch to Safari and use the Google search field there? I can think of two explanations for this widget’s existence: (a) Google paid for this (see Om Malik’s report from September onGoogle paying for preferred treatment in browser search fields); or (b) it’s a wee bit of spite from Apple toward Yahoo, their rival widgeteer.
It could just be coincidence, but there’s a bit more visual consistency with these latest widget revisionsThe Address Book, Google, and People widgets all use very similar color schemes, and the Business widget is the same but yellow, which makes perfect sense given its role as a yellow pages front-end.
More disheartening is that fact that the new widgets based on web services are utterly U.S.-centric: People and Business only query U.S. phone book listings, and the new Ski Report widget only has data for U.S滑雪度假村I am fairly certain that at least some people outside the U.Shave telephones, and that some of them may ski as well[更新：I stand corrected, the Ski Report widget does list Canadian resorts along with at least some in EuropePoint still stands though that Apple’s widgets in general are U.S.-centric.]
iLife '06的重大新闻 - 除非你考虑到abolition of brushed metalwindows big news — is iWeb, a new app in the suiteIn a nut, iWeb is more or less Pages for the web — it’s not an app for designing your own web pages, but rather an app for publishing your own web pages using templates designed by AppleIt’s particularly focused on generating pages populated with content from the other iLife appsIt’s a great idea, very easy to use if you’re publishing to your .Mac account, and I predict it’s going to prove quite popular.
iWeb可用于发布到非.Mac服务器，但不能直接发布What you can do is export to a folder locally on your Mac, then upload that folder to a server using a standalone SFTP clientOr, if your web host supports WebDAV (like, say,TextDrive不2), you can mount your hosted space directly from the Finder as a network volume and save to it directly from iWeb.
Some of the features depend on .Mac, howeverFor example, the slideshow feature for sets of photos uses an entirely different implementation when you publish to a folder, because the fancier .Mac version relies on阿贾克斯, which in turn relies on server software that only runs on .MacThis isn’t a complaint — it wouldn’t be possible for Apple to create an Ajax-powered slideshow that could run on any arbitrary server.
[更新： Abe Fettig有独家新闻on exactly what’s going on with the .Mac-hosted slideshows; it’s不Ajax, but rather some custom server software that generates the glass floor reflections and high-quality thumbnails on-the-fly.]
为了比较,here’s the same photo set posted to my Flickr accountI think Apple’s slideshow compares well against Flickr’sThe only thing I dislike about Apple’s is the reflective glass floor mirror effect; it’s certainly cool, but I think it’s unnecessarily distracting for the display of photographsBut Apple’s slideshow pictures are bigger, and I like their controls better.
As a blogging tool, especially when combined with .Mac publishing, iWeb is incredibly easy to useIt compares terribly against most major weblog packages in terms of features3— because iWeb is a desktop app that pushes your weblog to the server as a set of static files, there aren’t any interactive features like comments.4
胜利的地方在于易于创作You just write, and to add photos or movies or audio clips, you just drag them into your blog editing window它只是有效Apple has completely ignored the features race in order to concentrate on simplicity and obviousness. People who have no idea how to publish anything on the web are going to be able to use iWeb to publish all sort of stuff to the web.
Regarding the XHTML markup iWeb generates, there’s good news and bad newsThe good news is that it validates (as XHTML 1.0 Transitional) and uses CSS for layout (as opposed to tables)The bad news is that it几乎完全忽略了标签语义, and the CSS is sprinkled around inline in the markupE.g., instead of wrapping paragraphs with
< p >tags, perhaps with a class attribute, iWeb wraps them with:
<div class =“paragraph Body”style =“line-height：20px;”>
这令人失望，但并非令人发指。Scott Stevenson likes the photo gallery featureand his first impression was that iWeb’s markup was pretty goodStevenson is a very smart guy, but he’s not a professional web developer, and I suspect his perspective on iWeb’s markup is similar to that of the engineers on the iWeb team.
I have a feeling the iWeb engineers were expecting praise for the fact that the markup iWeb produces validates; instead, most of the reaction from the web-development community has been focused on the semantics, and the descriptions are using严厉的words like “awful” and “atrocious”.
The reasons why iWeb would do well to generate more semantic markup are multitudinous, but I won’t waste time covering them hereMy suggestion to the iWeb team: buy yourselves a copy of Jeffrey Zeldman’s使用Web标准进行设计, or, better yet, get Apple to cough up the dough to fly MrZeldman out for a few hours of consultation.
我的观点是iWeb的XHTML生成器不atrocious; it is trying to do the right thing but has fallen shortIt should be improved, not scrapped.
iLife不再支持G3处理器, but it does support Mac OS X 10.3.9Now strikes me as a reasonable time for Apple to start dropping G3 support.
It seems like every January during his keynote, Steve Jobs demos a new version of iPhoto and says that, finally, the new version is faster今年确实如此iPhoto 6 is just terrific: way faster than iPhoto 5, and consumes significantly less memory (which two points are quite possibly related).
说到内存消耗,iWeb是一个真正的猪While putting together the aforementioned photo galleries, iWeb consumed over 600 MB of private memory.
iPhoto’s new photocasting feature is a terrific idea: share a stream of photos via RSS so that your subscribers can be automatically apprised when new photos are added to the stream. The implementation, however, is pretty badLook no further than Mark Pilgrim’s “Unofficial Documentation of iPhoto 6.0 Photocasting Feeds”, posted to Apple’s Syndication-Dev mailing list朝圣者的结论几乎总结了：
iPhoto 6 doesn’t understand the first thing about HTTP, the first thing about XML, or the first thing about RSSIt ignores features of HTTP that Netscape 4 supported in 1996, and mis-implements features of XML that Microsoft got right in 1997. It ignores 95% of RSS and Atom and gets most of the remaining 5% wrong.
I haven’t looked at it yet, but, in a nice move, a 30-day demo ships in the iLife ’06 package.
Jobs barely touched on either iWork app in his keynote, other than to show off the way they allow you to create three-dimensional graphs from two-dimensional data,which you should never do说真的，请不要这样做。
AppleWorks is dead — it is not included with either of the new Intel-based MacsThis is why I predicted Apple would announce a spreadsheetThere is no spreadsheet on these new Macs, other than a demo version of Excel.
Of course, even if there were a new spreadsheet app in iWork ’06, it too, like Excel, would only be included as a demo(iWork is not included, other than as a demo, with either new machine.) So maybe the answer is something even simpler — a free app that is to spreadsheets what TextEdit is to word processors.
The best you can say about AppleWorks, as it stands today, is that it’s dated — but it works, people absolutely still use it, and its death leaves a significant hole in Mac OS X’s standard software line-up.
照明，极端慢动作摄影，音乐, the words — the ad is beautifulIt has a Kubrickian vibe that warms my heart这是电视广告。
英特尔芯片多年来，它一直被困在PC中Dull little boxes, dutily performing dull little tasks, when it could have been doing so much more.
“Never would we characterize our customers that way,” Intel Vice President Deborah Conrad said in an interview.
Conrad said that Intel cooperated with Apple for some particulars of the TV spot, but added, “We didn’t know what the end result was going to be.”
The company did get a peek at the ad before Tuesday’s keynote, but it wasn’t too much earlier.
“It’s probably a good thing that we didn’t see them earlier,” Conrad said.
不要相信英特尔爱这则广告This ad makes Intel processors look better than any ad Intel has ever produced itselfThe feeling this ad conveys is that Intel’s chips are going to be kicking some goddamn major ass inside Macs.