Reviews

Hardware review: Apple MacBook

The Apple MacBookI visited the Apple Store over the weekend and took a look at the new MacBook (the iBook replacement). Apple’s outsourced the production of this laptop to Asus, but it’s definitely still an Apple. It was supposed to arrive in June, so it’s ahead of schedule.

The overall impression is that it’s a very nice laptop, and a welcome successor to the iBook, whose design I thought was in need of improvement. The MacBook is thin, glossy, and beautiful. The design is very similar to the MacBook Pro, except that the case is plastic, not aluminum.

The option to get it in two colors is a nice touch, and coming from Apple, is a tip of the hat to PC laptop users, who are used to the black color. The two finishes are a bit different. While the outside of the computers are similarly glossy, no matter the color, the insides are another story. The white MacBook’s inside finish is a little grainier than that of the black MacBook.

Having never owned a white iBook before, I wondered what grime from everyday use would do to the keyboard and the white finish. I can say that my white iMac keyboard has stood the test of time well so far (since last September, at any rate.) I can also say that I could see grease from people’s hands on the black MacBook in the store. The grease didn’t show on the white MacBook, but there was a bit of grime. I guess you can take your pick: grease or grime. That’s why I always wash my hands before using the computer.

Apple did another nice thing by including some of the features people have come to love on the MacBook Pro as standard on the MacBook: integrated iSight, remote control with FrontRow, and the MagSafe power adapter. This is good stuff!

The wide screen is beautiful. I know people are used to the matte screens, but either finish is fine with me. What I look for in a screen is brightness, high resolution, a wide aspect ratio, and wide reading angles, and the MacBook has all those.

The lid doesn’t have a latch like the MacBook Pro or the now-extinct PowerBook. Instead, it has a notch, so you can just pull it up. What I didn’t like so much is that the lid seemed pretty flexible. If I grabbed the corners, I could bend it back and forth, and I wondered what that would do to the display after long-term use.

The keyboard is interesting. One thing I liked on the iBook was the ability to remove the keyboard in just a few seconds. That was handy in case you spilled something on it. You could rinse it, and wipe underneath. With the new MacBook, the keys rise out of the plastic casing, and they’re more square around the edges than I’m used to. They’re very similar (although the feel is much better) to the keyboards one finds on the computers inside REI stores. The design is utilitarian. But again, I wonder if Apple’s placed anything under the MacBook keyboard to guard against spills.

I wasn’t thrilled with the battery lock, which is a coin-screw. I guess that’ll come in handy for college students without a screwdriver, but I would have liked to see a latch. The coin screw will get damaged over time (it’s plastic) and it’ll look bad. The store model’s screw was already damaged.

I like that Apple’s put a Firewire port on the MacBook. I think their decision to start moving away from Firewire was a very silly one. Firewire is so much better than USB in many ways, and I’ll hopefully detail them in a future post. The digital audio inputs and outputs, which used to be standard only on the PowerBook G4 17″ models, are now standard across the line, including the MacBook. I was amazed to find out this little tidbit.

The Intel Core Duo chip is another nice surprise. Initially, there was talk of only having a single core chip on the MacBook, so this is a bonus as far as I’m concerned. The applications loaded very fast, even with only the standard 512MB of RAM. I’d like to see how the MacBook works with 1GB of RAM and Photoshop. The graphics card uses shared memory, so if you’re thinking of using this laptop for graphics-heavy applications, in particular video, you may want to upgrade to the MacBook Pro line, which has a graphics card with dedicated memory.

I wasn’t happy when I learned that it weighs 5.5 lbs. For a 13.3″ laptop, that’s a lot of weight! But I guess that’s what happens when you pack a lot of features into a tiny laptop. They add to the weight. It’s the same as my MINI. You wouldn’t think a car that small could weigh over 2,700 lbs., but it does!

Last but not least, the MacBook comes with the latest version of the iLife software, which allows for just about the easiest creation of web pages, blogs and podcasts.

Bottom line: I really liked it, and I’ve already started recommending it to my friends. But, given the shortcomings outlined above, such as the overly flexible lid and new keyboard, I’d also recommend buying an AppleCare Plan, just in case.

(Photo courtesy of Apple. This review can also be read on BlogCritics.)

Standard
Reviews

Caveat emptor: Davison Inventegration will just take your money

I’d forgotten about my bad experience with these people until they sent me some spam a couple of weeks ago. To return the favor, I’m going to tell you what I know of them, and believe me, it’s not pretty…

These days, they’ve got a new domain (davisongetresults.com) which acts as a forward to their old domain (davison54.com). They’re billing themselves as the inventor’s helper, and say they can “get your idea to market”. They’re still brandishing their “Inventegration” process, and they’re still puffing up their feathers about their proven experience of getting products to market. Check out the products they have gotten to market, and you be the judge of whether you’d call that experience. I have to chuckle at their marketing language: “Davison is fast becoming the industry leader when it comes to preparing and presenting new product ideas to corporations for possible licensing.” Compared to whom? By the way, surf the site to find out more about this Davison fellow, but you won’t find his full name or photograph anywhere. Does that begin to tell you something?

I’ll let you discover their website and judge it by yourselves. Let me not waste time and tell you about my experience. In ’03, I had an idea for a new faucet and fell for one of their spam emails. I contacted them, got their information package, and, not knowing any better, decided to go ahead and try to use them. The first step was their “confidential and professional” evaluation of my idea’s marketability – in other words, they would let me know whether my idea was worth pursuing. Hey, sounds good, right? I decided to go forward. In a couple of days, they contacted me and told me in no uncertain terms that they thought my idea was wonderful, and that they’d love to help me sell it to companies. I notice now they’ve gotten away from that nowadays. On their site, they say: “Davison does not perform analysis of the potential feasibility, marketability, patentability or profitability of ideas submitted to it.” But they WERE doing this when I dealt with them. So I guess they discovered it got them into too much hot water and decided it wasn’t worth it…

After telling me how good my idea was, the fellow with whom I dealt, possibly Davison himself, proceeded to give me the hard sell. They wouldn’t go ahead without a professional market study. After all, how could they gauge my idea’s marketability without one? No matter that they had just performed a professional analysis of my idea, a market study was still needed before we got to the good part, where they prepared my idea and marketed it to companies through their “exclusive contacts”. The cost, you ask? Oh, a mere $800, or a little less than that. For me, since I was cash strapped at the time, Davison would be able to take $100 off. What a nice guy, right? So I waited, and waited, and waited, after putting the bill on my credit card, and finally got my “professional market study”. I still have it, as a memento of my foolishness. It’s a bunch of web pages, printed out and stuck in a cheap binder, some from retail websites, and some from the US Patent Office database, where did a simple query on faucets. Basically, it’s all stuff marginally related to my idea, that they searched hastily and printed out. I could have done this myself in about 1-2 hours, but I ended up paying about $700 for it instead, because my powers of judgment must have been sleeping then.

So I figured okay, this sucks, but let me see what the next step is. I called them – they didn’t call me anymore this time. Davison probably figured that if I’m moronic enough to want to go forward after that botched up job they called a market study, then I deserve to lose my money… So I called him, and asked him how we’d proceed. I expressed my disappointment with the “market study”, and he said, nonchalantly, that that’s how they’re done… Ahem… Then he said all the preliminary steps were done, and and all we’d need to go forward with right now was the preparation of my product, and that he had the facilities to help me with that. I asked, what about presenting my idea to companies? No such thing yet, he said. We don’t want to risk rejection of your idea. First we need to prepare a model of your idea, so they have something in front of them. I knew I shouldn’t ask, but I did anyway… How much would it cost? Only $10,000-12,000, he said. (!)

It was then I realized I’d been strung along and pumped for cash, because I’d been a fool. But I figured, hey, let me do my homework, right? So I told him I needed to think about it, and I hung up the phone. Then I did my homework, which I should have done months before, and learned my lesson the hard way. Davison is part of a group of many inventor helper companies that have sprung up recently, that will pump naive inventors like me for money. The fools that we are, we believe they’re really interested in helping us, when all they care about is getting our money to supposedly “package our product for the market”. Their fees are ridiculous, and they don’t care if our ideas are good or not, but we fall for it, because we don’t know any better. If you don’t believe, do a search on the internet for “davison inventegration” or “davison idea” and see what you’ll find. Here is a sample of what’s there. Even the FTC has a published brief that was filed against these crooks, for “deceptive practices”.

I was a gentleman with him back then. I called him a couple of days later, and told him I was disappointed with the so called market study, and that I wouldn’t go forward with their “inventegration” process. This whole dirty matter would have stayed safely in my past if they hadn’t spammed me. Well, if they’re so thoughtless that they won’t let sleeping dogs lie, I hope this teaches them a lesson, and it teaches you, the reader with an idea, NOT to use them.

Updated 5/26/10: The FTC has gotten involved with Davison, due to all the claims people have filed against them, and Davison has settled and mailed checks to the people whose money they took under false pretenses. I received two letters (with checks enclosed), one in 2009, and one in 2010, mentioning the FTC lawsuit settlements. I’m posting them below for you. If you didn’t receive a settlement check and you’ve lost a lot of money with Davison, my advice to you is that you look into your legal options — talk with a trustworthy, knowledgeable lawyer and see what’s to be done.

Standard
Thoughts

Google's live tests

Just stumbled onto another entry on the Google Blog which helps explain why I’ve been seeing reports on other blogs of different interfaces for Google’s Search or other products. Apparently they choose to use (at random) sets of live users, and open the additional functionality to them for a limited time, to see how they’d interact with it. The reason is simple: there’s no substitute for real-world testing. This is pretty cool. See the entry here.

Standard
Reviews

Google Pages, re-launched

Justin Rosenstein, Product Manager and Google Page Creator, posted an entry to the Google Blog a few days ago where he detailed the reason for the application. If my memory serves me right, Google Pages launched a few months ago, but access to it was withdrawn or limited in some way. Perhaps the Google folks thought it needed some more work. Anyway, Justin has just re-launched it, so I assume it’s now ready for public consumption.

Just tried it out, and it does seem to be a really easy way to create web pages, much like the .Mac service – except this is free, and there don’t appear to be any bandwidth limitations, at least none I can find. Then again, there isn’t the tight integration here that one finds on the .Mac service, such as with GarageBand or iPhoto, to allow for one-click publishing of podcasts or photos. Still, it’s a pretty cool service.

Here’s the link to the Google Blog entry, and here’s a link to Google Pages.

Standard
How To

New clothes washer uses steam and no detergent

Gizmag has the details on a new electric-powered clotheswasher that uses no detergent, only steam. The steam cycle can be used alone, or in combination with the normal hot/warm water cycles. It’s made by LG.

Standard