Bare minimum for kitchen and FaceTime MacBook?

[ViRGE]

Used Macs (laptops especially) rarely make sense IMO. They're not really always such awesome machines, it's just that people are used to completely unrealistic resale prices.

This is a good point. Used Macs hold their value to a ridiculous degree. This is good for the seller, but not so much for the buyer.

 

[Eug]

Well to be thruthful you then have 1 of 2 options...

You can either spend half the amount on a new Macbook on use C2D model which is only going to become obsolete shortly.

Or you can buy her a refurbed Macbook pro that will have the year warranty, or 2 years however long they give you in Canada and will be usefull for a lot longer.

Why would you spend money on technology from 2008-2010? It's silly. Even 2011 is pushing it.

If you're going to be using the "obsolete" argument, I personally think ALL Mac laptops are already obsolete. Why? Cuz they don't have 802.11ac. That might be an extreme view because 802.11ac isn't even officially out, but it's a technology that's a key benefit for real world usage and one that will be standard for years to come, and hardware with 802.11ac is already available.

The Mac laptops that are just slightly older are really, really obsolete, because they only come with USB 2, not USB 3.

I've said before on this forum that I wouldn't buy another new Mac until it got both USB 3 and 802.11ac. (I count refurb as "new".) Luckily, that might be at the next iteration, and the MacBook Air is due for release soon, perhaps by the end of this quarter. Same goes for the MacBook Pro.

However, in truth, for a secondary computer, "obsolete" is OK. It just pains me to spend a thousand bux for an "obsolete" computer.

 

[Eug]

I've said before on this forum that I wouldn't buy another new Mac until it got both USB 3 and 802.11ac. (I count refurb as "new".) Luckily, that might be at the next iteration, and the MacBook Air is due for release soon, perhaps by the end of this quarter. Same goes for the MacBook Pro.

Hmmm... One can only hope...

 

[TheStu]

Hmmm... One can only hope...

Yea, I don't think anything changed. But they got rid of the 'What's New' list from the right column with their most recent face-lift, so I can't be 100% positive that they didn't add new Smart Cover colors or something.

 

[umrigar]

the idea that because an otherwise amazing Mac doesn't have USB 3.0, it's now somehow "obsolete" is ludicrous.

less bleeding-edge, sure. hell, bang on Apple for using last-gen GPUs in some of their Macs, or 5400 RPM platter drives - those i'll agree with.

and don't get me started on newer Macs removing ports like FW800 and audio-in, and the optical drive in favor of a thin edge (iMac 2012).

for the right price, an older Mac can be a great deal; but many folks overcharge for what they're worth, because they are expensive to start with.

buy a refurb, add Applecare, and sell it 18-24 months into ownership. you will get a large chunk of your purchase price back, and you can roll it into a newer refurb, keeping more current.

 

[Eug]

the idea that because an otherwise amazing Mac doesn't have USB 3.0, it's now somehow "obsolete" is ludicrous.

No it isn't, at least if you're spending 4-digit $ on a computer. USB 3 is a basic feature in 2013, and I think it's really foolish to get any brand new computer without USB 3, unless you're getting it really cheap. 4-digit $ (after taxes) isn't exactly cheap.

I might agree with you if an entry level Apple laptop was < $600 but it isn't.

The optical drive is irrelevant, because you can use an external drive if you really need it.

 

[Eug]

So, I bought an obsolete 2008 MacBook 4,1 A1181:

http://support.apple.com/kb/sp5

It has a 45 nm Penryn 2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo
Intel X3100 graphics
2 GB DDR2 667 MHz
USB 2
Mini-DVI
Firewire 400
Magsafe
Audio input
Audio output
iSight
DVD-RW
Gigabit Ethernet
Scrolling trackpad
250 GB 5400 rpm HD

The original battery only had about 3800 mAh left on it, but the store swapped in a newer battery from one of the other used machines they had for sale. This one has about 4800 mAh, which is not bad considering it's 5200 mAh new I think. The charger looks almost brand new though, surprisingly. When did they start selling the right-angle MagSafe chargers? Maybe they gave me a newer model charger. Cuz my newer 2009 MacBook Pro has the older straight Magsafe adapter.

It currently has 10.6.8 on it, but I booted up 10.7.1 Lion off Firewire and it works fine. 10.8 doesn't boot, not surprisingly.

vlc with 1080p H.264 MKV works fine. No stuttering at all.
However, HD Netflix and HD YouTube stutter a bit sometimes, so as predicted, the GeForce 9400M is preferred.

Oh well, whatever. Otherwise it feels fast enough for now. Given that I paid a little over $400 for it all-in (with 1 month warranty), I figure it's fine. Even if Apple does release a less expensive 128 GB 11.6" Air with 802.11ac (and USB 3) this summer/fall we could always get that then, and sell this thing for $350+. Or maybe when I want to upgrade the MacBook Pro's 128 GB SSD to 256, I'll put the 128 in this machine.

Despite its limitations, my wife really likes it because now her Flash works, etc. and it's way, way faster than what she was used to. And it's white. She actually likes it better than my MacBook Pro because it has a physical trackpad button. I'm trying to convert her to the clickable glass trackpad though, which I prefer.

 

[Tegeril]

Yeah the X3100 doesn't support Mountain Lion. I'd have tried to grab a 9400m system, but either way it's just going in your kitchen.

 

[Eug]

I was looking at another store which supposedly had a 2.13 GHz Core 2 Duo MacBook 5,2 with GeForce 9400M and a 90 day warranty for about $80 more all-in, but a lot of the units there looked like they were really bad shape. Every single one on display was chipped or cracked in very visible spots. I'd rather have the nice case than the GeForce 9400M, but I didn't feel like wasting more time hoping an inexpensive 9400M model with pristine case would show up.

The one I got with the X3100 from the other store had a pristine and keyboard/trackpad area top case. It still looks used, but decent. The ones in that other store looked battered.

BTW, comparison against my MacBook Pro. MacBook 2.4 GHz T8300 feels just as fast as the MacBook Pro 2.26 GHz P8400 (excluding HD related activities, since I have an SSD in the MBP.) Battery max charge on the MacBook is about 4800 mAh and on the MacBook Pro is about 4700 mAh, but battery life on the MacBook Pro is much better. That makes sense considering the TDP of the T8300 is 35 W and on the P8400 it's 25 W.

Keyboard key action is identical, but I like the textured feel of the keys on the MacBook better. They're slippery on the MacBook Pro. The Pro also has a backlit keyboard.

The screen on the MBP just looks better.

The case sturdiness on the MBP is obviously much better. In fact, in the used store, the MBPs all looked near-new, whereas some of the MBs looked worn. Unfortunately, the MBPs were priced at least twice as much.

These machines need Retina. 2560x1600 is perfect at 13" for the MBP. I like the text size on these units, since they have a ppi of 113. The 11" Air's ppi is a little high, with small text.

Two-finger scrolling works on the MacBook, but inertial scrolling doesn't. There is a setting in the Universal Access Prefs in Lion 10.7 for inertial scrolling, but it doesn't do anything on the MacBook. Inertial scrolling works fine on the MacBook Pro. There must be a terminal command somewhere to activate it on the MacBook, but I can't find it for Lion. There were ones for Snow Leopard though I believe.

Neither machine is exactly light. What I'd like to see is a 13" Retina Air with 2560x1600 screen.

 

[Spicedaddy]

Refurb != Used

That said, what would be a reasonable price for that system in your opinion? That refurb cost is $200 off the cost of new, and still comes with the same warranty as a new system.

I know, I meant the used ones cost too much, so I'd get that refurb model.

 

[Eug]

Arrggh. The place just got in a 9400M model. However, it's a 2.13 GHz version... but then again, it's actually 20 bux cheaper than what I paid for my X3100. I guess it's really the CPU that sells. Mine's 2.4 GHz. Dunno the condition of the battery or case is either.

Anyways, I've been testing out YouTube HD and Netflix HD more. I'm on 10.7.5 and have the latest Silverlight.

It turns out even my MacBook Pro 2.26 GHz P8400 with GeForce 9400M does actually stutter occasionally with some of the YouTube HD clips. However, I blame Flash. It's just not well implemented for this. OTOH, with other YouTube HD 1080p clips, both are smooth. The difference is the MBP can multi-task better. Do anything while the 1080 video is playing on the MB and it stutters.

CPU usage is somewhat higher on the MB at 105% (out of 200%) but 80% on the MBP. However, the fan gets loud on the MB and not loud on MBP.

As for Netflix HD, the MacBook Pro 9400M remains stutter-free, but there are still occasional stutters on the MB. There are also occasional weird glitches in windowed mode. This may also be an implementation issue, because I tried the Microsoft Silverlight demo and it plays perfectly at full 24 fps with no dropped frames:

http://www.iis.net/media/experiencesmoothstreaming

This demo looks identical on the MB and my Core i7 iMac.

I'm not surprised this is an implementation issue, cuz with my 2.9 GHz triple-core Athlon II X3 with integrated GeForce 9200 on Windows 7, I can't get stutter-free Netflix HD playback either.

 

[Tegeril]

You should check the rendering pipeline on the YouTube videos you're watching. Right click the video player and select Show Video Info.

You're looking for:
'accelerated video rendering'
and
'accelerated video decoding'

You may see 'software video rendering' or 'software video decoding' and it can vary by video and by browser. Depending on what you see, your CPU is being used to do more or less. What browser are you trying this with? Flash Player has the ability to be completely hardware rendered on your GPU depending on various circumstances (one case that causes software fallbacks is compatibility with non-GPU accelerate-able video such as VP6 can cause software fallbacks that have nothing to do with it being Flash's fault).

I'm not sure the X3100 supports StageVideo in OS X. You can see if it is supported at all by Stage3D by going to: http://helpx.adobe.com/x-productkb/multi/stage3d-unsupported-chipsets-drivers-flash.html

Flash is very well implemented for video at this time if you have the hardware to support it.

 

[Eug]

Yup, Flash 11 in OS X doesn't support X3100 acceleration at all, neither in the Baseline nor Constrained profiles, but does support 9400M acceleration for both profiles.

Interestingly, Flash 11 in Windows 7 does support the Constrained profile on X3100 (DirectX9Ex), but not the Baseline profile. I don't really know what that really means in terms of specs, but I tried YouTube HD and it works better on X3100 on a slow CPU (Pentium SU4100 - see my sig) in Windows than it does in Mac OS X with this 2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo. I had hoped X3100 on OS X would be at least the same with this much, much faster CPU, but unfortunately this is not the case.

Also, I was testing some high bitrate H.264 MKV and even locally, there are occasional lost frames on OS X. So it seems vlc doesn't make use of X3100 acceleration on OS X either. The same files play perfectly on Windows 7 with X3100, using Windows Media Player (with Haali Media Splitter). However, they don't play cleanly with vlc in Windows either. Note that the lost frames on OS X occur even when the CPU is using only say 110% (out of 200%), so somehow it can't make use of all the available CPU cycles to avoid frame dropouts. On Windows with WMP, the CPU usage with X3100 is relatively low, despite the slow CPU. Pentium SU4100 is probably only half as fast as Core 2 Duo T8300.

So, it seems the hardware is more than capable of handling these files, as long as hardware decode acceleration on the X3100 is used. Unfortunately, the driver/software support for X3100 is lacking, and it's worse on OS X than it is on Windows 7.

Ironically, I bought this SU4100 X3100 laptop several years ago brand new, for less money than this used MacBook in 2013.

[EDIT]

Nope. My machine has a 4500MHD, not an X3100. So, all that stuff above about X3100 working on Windows for H.264 is wrong.

[/EDIT]

BTW, none of this matters at all to my wife. Nonetheless, it bugs me, so I may go check out that 9400M MacBook this week. I am also looking for an excuse to upgrade the SSD in my MacBook Pro, and take the old SSD and put it in the MacBook, but I don't feel it's worth it to put an SSD in a computer that can't handle HD properly.

10.8 support would also be a bonus, but it's not really a big deal to me actually. I'm still running 10.7 on my iMac Core i7. I have 10.8 on my MacBook Pro but I'm fine with 10.7.

What's ironic is that Apple states a 2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo is required for 1080p iTunes content. So, technically, that means my MacBook 2.4 GHz is supported, but my MacBook Pro 2.26 GHz is not.

 

[ViRGE]

The short explanation for that you can take your pick of software and hardware; when it comes to the X3100 on Mac OS X both are rather rubbish. On the software side of things the GMA drivers have always been plagued with issues (primarily outright bugs) and they have never exposed all of the GPU's functionality. On the hardware side of things the GMA hardware has its own issues, and there are a disturbing number of workarounds in the X3100 drivers (Windows and OS X) to cope with that. X3100 was Intel's first-generation DX10 GPU and from an era where Intel still didn't take GPUs seriously, so it shows.

Anyhow, as for video decode in particular, you're running into two things. The big problem is that all H.264 hardware decoding on Mac OS X requires using Apple's Video Decode Acceleration framework, and VDA doesn't support the X3100 series. The bare minimum for that is GeForce 9400M, Radeon HD 4xxx, and Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge). Apple has never stated why exactly X3100 isn't supported by VDA, but compared to all of those other video decoders X3100's video decode block is very primitive. It's long been assumed that Apple decided to set their baseline feature set for VDA rather high, and that there are features they needed that X3100 could not provide. Coincidentally, X3100 doesn't support DXVA-HD under Windows, so it's not just Mac OS X that's held back.

 

[Eug]

EDIT AGAIN:

I'm officially a moron. This Windows machine has a 4500MHD, not an X3100. No wonder it works so well for HD H.264.

This explains everything. I can't believe how stupid I can be sometimes. Feel free to disregard everything below.

Coincidentally, X3100 doesn't support DXVA-HD under Windows, so it's not just Mac OS X that's held back.

Well, that's just it. In Windows Media Player, X3100 works perfectly for high bitrate H.264 playback, which is is as smooth as my baby's butt. CPU usage is relatively low, on a slow CPU, and there are no video glitches either.

Furthermore, Blu-ray playback is completely smooth.

I just downloaded DXVA Checker and it states my Windows Intel GMA X3100 laptop does support DXVA-HD.

DVXAHD_Device_Type_Hardware: Yes

However, I don't understand all the various specific features, and a lot of them are not supported. Nonetheless, real world I do get significant hardware acceleration on Windows 7 with X3100, using Windows Media Player.

=== EDIT ===

These are the results for my X3100 in DVXA checker:

DeviceType
DXVAHD_Device_Type_Hardware: Yes
DXVAHD_Device_Type_Software: -
DXVAHD_Device_Type_Reference: -
DXVAHD_Device_Type_Other: -

DeviceCaps
DXVAHD_Device_Caps_Linear_Space: No
DXVAHD_Device_Caps_xvYCC: No
DXVAHD_Device_Caps_RGB_Range_Conversion: No
DXVAHD_Device_Caps_YCbCr_Matrix_Conversion: No

FeatureCaps
DXVAHD_Feature_Caps_Alpha_Fill: No
DXVAHD_Feature_Caps_Constriction: No
DXVAHD_Feature_Caps_Luma_Key: Yes
DXVAHD_Feature_Caps_Alpha_Palette: No

FilterCaps
DXVAHD_Filter_Caps_Brightness: Yes
DXVAHD_Filter_Caps_Contrast: Yes
DXVAHD_Filter_Caps_Hue: Yes
DXVAHD_Filter_Caps_Saturation: Yes
DXVAHD_Filter_Caps_Noise_Reduction: No
DXVAHD_Filter_Caps_Edge_Enhancement: No
DXVAHD_Filter_Caps_Anamorphic_Scaling: No

InputFormatCaps
DXVAHD_Input_Format_Caps_RGB_Interlaced: No
DXVAHD_Input_Format_Caps_RGB_ProcAmp: No
DXVAHD_Input_Format_Caps_RGB_Luma_Key: No
DXVAHD_Input_Format_Caps_Palette_Interlaced: No

InputFormats
InputFormat_1: X8R8G8B8
InputFormat_2: A8R8G8B8
InputFormat_3: YUY2
InputFormat_4: AYUV
InputFormat_5: NV12
InputFormat_6: AI44
InputFormat_7: IA44
InputFormat_8: P8

OutputFormats
OutputFormat_1: X8R8G8B8
OutputFormat_2: A8R8G8B8

VideoProcessorCount: 1

MaxInputStreams: 6

MaxStreamStates: 8

---

PastFrames: 1

FutureFrames: 1

ProcessorCaps
DXVAHD_Processor_Caps_Deinterlace_Blend: Yes
DXVAHD_Processor_Caps_Deinterlace_BOB: Yes
DXVAHD_Processor_Caps_Deinterlace_Adaptive: Yes
DXVAHD_Processor_Caps_Deinterlace_Motion_Compensation: No
DXVAHD_Processor_Caps_Inverse_Telecine: No
DXVAHD_Processor_Caps_Frame_Rate_Conversion: No

ITelecineCaps
DXVAHD_ITelecine_Caps_32: No
DXVAHD_ITelecine_Caps_22: No
DXVAHD_ITelecine_Caps_2224: No
DXVAHD_ITelecine_Caps_2332: No
DXVAHD_ITelecine_Caps_32322: No
DXVAHD_ITelecine_Caps_55: No
DXVAHD_ITelecine_Caps_64: No
DXVAHD_ITelecine_Caps_87: No
DXVAHD_ITelecine_Caps_222222222223: No
DXVAHD_ITelecine_Caps_Other: No

CustomRate: -

---

Don't know if this helps, but the Windows 7 H.264 decoders are new, and are Media Foundation. Here is what is being used for H.264 MKV playback on my machine. (I assume the red is the mode being used.)

[DS] Microsoft DTV-DVD Video Decoder [DXVA1/2] [avc1 1920x1080]
ModeMPEG2_VLD: DXVA2
ModeMPEG2_IDCT: DXVA2
ModeMPEG2_MoComp: DXVA2
ModeMPEG2_A: DXVA1
ModeMPEG2_C: DXVA1
ModeH264_VLD_FGT: DXVA2
ModeH264_VLD_FGT_ClearVideo: DXVA2
ModeH264_VLD_NoFGT: DXVA2
ModeH264_VLD_NoFGT_ClearVideo: DXVA2 (EVR)
ModeH264_IDCT_FGT: DXVA2
ModeH264_IDCT_NoFGT: DXVA2
ModeH264_MoComp_FGT: DXVA2
ModeH264_MoComp_NoFGT: DXVA2

 

[Eug]

Bah, the 2009 9400M Macbook looked like it was thrown in the dirt and stomped on. Works fine, but I'll stick with my 2008 X3100 model.

BTW, they wanted twice as much money for 2009 2.26 GHz 13" MacBook Pro with 9400M.

 

[Eug]

Also, I was testing some high bitrate H.264 MKV and even locally, there are occasional lost frames on OS X.

---

Note that the lost frames on OS X occur even when the CPU is using only say 110% (out of 200%), so somehow it can't make use of all the available CPU cycles to avoid frame dropouts.

Anyhow, as for video decode in particular, you're running into two things. The big problem is that all H.264 hardware decoding on Mac OS X requires using Apple's Video Decode Acceleration framework, and VDA doesn't support the X3100 series. The bare minimum for that is GeForce 9400M, Radeon HD 4xxx, and Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge). Apple has never stated why exactly X3100 isn't supported by VDA, but compared to all of those other video decoders X3100's video decode block is very primitive. It's long been assumed that Apple decided to set their baseline feature set for VDA rather high, and that there are features they needed that X3100 could not provide. Coincidentally, X3100 doesn't support DXVA-HD under Windows, so it's not just Mac OS X that's held back.

It turns out some of the dropped-frames issue is software related. vlc just doesn't like slower machines with no hardware H.264 acceleration. I tried the exact same files with a different player, MPlayerX. With MPlayerX the CPU usage was about the same (110% or so), but the files played smoothly.

2.4 GHz T8300 + MPlayerX is still not as good as a 9400M based machine, because you could feel the OS slowing right down - multitasking isn't very good and things get jerky during multitasking sometimes. However, it's way better than using vlc. With vlc not only do you get the dropped frames, but the multitasking is much worse. Furthermore with vlc in this setup, FF and RW in a high bitrate, high profile, HD 1080p H.264 video can be a real pain, causing it to lockup for a time while it contemplates its navel. MPlayerX OTOH is responsive with the same files.

The other big drawback with MPlayerX (or vlc) on this machine is that since it's all CPU-based decoding, the battery life drops quickly, and the fan revs high. But hey, at least now it works smoothly. I've switched the MPlayerX full-time on this machine. I've read that vlc works better with obscure file formats, but so far with the files I've tried, MPlayerX is fine.

BTW, I'm not sure if it was just chance or what, but I seemed to get a bit more frame drops in vlc with 3 GB RAM than I did with 2 GB RAM, so I wonder if the change in memory bandwidth of single-channel vs. dual-channel might be making a small difference for video playback. So, instead of just sticking with 3 GB RAM, I'm just going to get 4 GB RAM for this machine (with a handmedown SSD), and call it a day. However, with everything else I do 3 GB was great. No visible slowdown, but a bigger amount of memory to use. New DDR2 SODIMMs are expensive now, but the pricing online is decent enough for used stuff. I just ordered 2x2 GB of Samsung-branded Korean-made CL5 DDR2 for about US$45.

Overkill for a kitchen computer, but why not...

 

[ViRGE]

New DDR2 SODIMMs are expensive now, but the pricing online is decent enough for used stuff. I just ordered 2x2 GB of Samsung-branded Korean-made CL5 DDR2 for about US$45.

Overkill for a kitchen computer, but why not...

I'm shocked you were able to find 4GB of DDR2 for so cheap. That's going to make a massive difference in performance, to say the least.

As for H.264 decoding performance, that's the first time I've ever seen anyone report seeing differences due to memory bandwidth. To the best of my knowledge H.264 isn't that bandwidth intensive, so I suspect what you saw is more a coincidence than a cause.

 

[Eug]

The $45 2x2 GB memory is used off eBay, not a regular retail store product, but at least it's name brand. Hopefully it doesn't suck. You can get new 2x2GB DDR2 SODIMM for about $50 locally, but it's 2nd tier brands like G.Skill and it's DDR2-800. (I've read that the MacBook won't boot DDR2-800 if it doesn't have the right SPD entries for 667 MHz function.) New big name brand DDR2 SODIMMs are more expensive though.

Yeah, maybe the single vs dual-channel thing was just chance. The occurrence of frame drops isn't entirely consistent.

BTW, I just tried the vlc 2.1 nightly. There are still dropped frames, but navigation is immensely better with some of the problem high bitrate files. The long navigation pauses have disappeared completely. Whatever they've done, it's a big step in the right direction. Now to fix those frame drops. Until then though, MPlayerX works fine.

 

[umrigar]

Have you tried forcing Safari to use HTML5 on YouTube? i think there's an extension for that...

 

[Eug]

Great idea! However, it's not critical since the screen is 1280x800 anyway, so 720p is fine. It's 1080p that stutters a bit (and really ramps up the fan), but I don't need to select 1080p.

It's more important for local files and files streamed from my NAS, because usually just have the 1080p version.

 

[onlyCOpunk]

By the sound of things this sounds more like a hobbyist side PC for you than just something your wife can use in the kitchen which has Flash support.

 

[Eug]

By the sound of things this sounds more like a hobbyist side PC for you than just something your wife can use in the kitchen which has Flash support.

Heh. I must admit, there is some element of that.

Otherwise it IS mainly for her, but sometimes say during breakfast at the kitchen I want to use it to watch video on it without having to run upstairs to get my MacBook Pro from my home office. Yeah, I'm lazy.

 

[Eug]

With a (supposedly slow) Kingston V+100 128 GB SSD in it, this 5 year-old MacBook flies now. TRIM was enabled with TRIM Enabler.

Can't wait for the 4 GB RAM to arrive.

I'm shocked you were able to find 4GB of DDR2 for so cheap. That's going to make a massive difference in performance, to say the least.

The $45 2x2 GB memory is used off eBay, not a regular retail store product, but at least it's name brand. Hopefully it doesn't suck. You can get new 2x2GB DDR2 SODIMM for about $50 locally, but it's 2nd tier brands like G.Skill and it's DDR2-800. (I've read that the MacBook won't boot DDR2-800 if it doesn't have the right SPD entries for 667 MHz function.) New big name brand DDR2 SODIMMs are more expensive though.

I just ordered another 4 GB (2x2) of DDR2 SODIMMs, this time for just $37.50 shipped, also from an high-rated eBay memory seller. This pair is DDR2-800/PC2-6400, for a Windows laptop.

BTW, with 2 GB the MacBook is mostly good for surfing. There are only rare small pageouts. However, once I start doing other stuff, even with just MS Office, the pageouts increase. With my usage, 4 GB RAM will eliminate the pageouts almost completely.

With 4 GB, I could actually use this machine as my full-time laptop. The main drawbacks are:

1) Mediocre battery life.
2) No H.264 acceleration.
3) No backlit keyboard.

Once you're used to a backlit keyboard, not having one becomes amazingly annoying.

P.S. I just fixed my iBook. It turns out the hard drive became corrupted. I just reformatted and reinstalled the OS, and now it works fine. Not sure what to do with it though, considering we now have 4 functional laptops (MacBook Pro, MacBook, iBook, Windows laptop) for just 2 people.

 

[ViRGE]

With a (supposedly slow) Kingston V+100 128 GB SSD in it, this 5 year-old MacBook flies now. TRIM was enabled with TRIM Enabler.

Aren't SSDs just completely awesome?