Hardware :: Original Batch Of Santa Rosa MBPs Failing?
Jun 27, 2008
Recently, an unknown number of first-revision Santa Rosa MacBook Pros began exhibiting issues with their onboard video cards. After a reboot, or on wake from sleep, the machine refuses to acknowledge the presence of a display, either internal or external. From that point on, the computer never regains its displays - not after a reboot, etc. Subsequent debugging indicates that the machine is misidentifying its NVIDIA GeForce 8600M GT card as the MacBook�s Intel X3100 card. This issue is known to affect at least 50 people - a group of affected users has formed a Google Spreadsheet in order to document and organize cases.
I know there are a ton of questions already about Windows 7 but its hard to find answers based on a specific model.
So I was just wondering... Those of you who have the Santa Rosa MacBook Pro (June 2007 model)... Have you successfully installed Windows 7 RC via Bootcamp? Easy/hard? What works and what doesn't? 32 bit or 64 bit?
I am a long-time Windows user who is now finally coming to her senses and wants to buy a Mac. I'm a grad student, I don't play computer games, but I need a fairly light notebook that will last me at least two years without feeling obsolete (like my current Dell). Right now I'm looking at the 2.4 ghz, 160 gig HD Macbook. Now that the MB's Intel chips are in their 4th generation, is it safe to say that something superior to the Core Duo Santa Rosa will be coming out soon? Of course I realize that as soon as you buy new technology, it will be out of date, but I'm curious if the Santa Rosa is the end of the line, so to speak, for the Core Duo, or not.Any other recommendations about making the switch from Windows to Leopard, as well as buying tips, would be much appreciated. Also, I've heard conflicting reports of Office 2008 for the Mac. Are people mostly happy with it?
I would like to change the hard drive of my MacBook Santa Rosa 13" 2.2 GHz.I would like to go fo an SSD Drive. I checked and find out that the kingston have got a good price. There is something that is quite annoying me though, they propose model with Serial ATA III and serial ATA II. I tought Serial ATA III was compatible with older technology. So my questions are: Why do they propose two versions (especially when the SATA II version is more expensive) ?Will a SATA III SSD will work in my old macbook ? any idea of the perf ?
Info: MacBook, Mac OS X (10.7.3), MacBook Santa Rosa 13" 2.2GHz
I have a MacBook Pro (Santa Rosa) with a 120GB hard drive. I would like to replace it myself with a 500GB drive. I know that in the desktop PC world certain BIOS and motherboards only support certain size drives. Is this true for Macs? I also read a comment by someone on another site stating his 500GB drive was a little thicker than the original drive in his MacBook Pro.
Whilst being supported under the last BC drivers available with Leopard Install DVD 10.5.6, Apple has decided that there is no need for any further support for Windows x64 on the Macbooks and Macbooks Pro prior to 2008. So no HFS+ read support in Windows for us, then. Since Microsoft has dumped i386 for its server line and it is pretty clear that Windows 7 is the last 32 bit release from Microsoft, it makes sense to install the 64 bit version now for easier upgrading in the future. Plus you actually get to use the 4GB of ram installed in your machines.
So why this retrograde step Apple, particularly as you were trumpeting the virtues of 64 bit processing in your own latest offering?
I have a White MacBook (13-inch Early 2008 model A1181) Penryn 2.4Ghz. The current logic board in there is Apple part# 820-2279-A. Is a late 2007 Santa Rosa 2.2Ghz board (with the same part number 820-2279-A) a direct swap for the Penryn board?
I only started noticing my fan running a bit on the fast side this evening after installing the new Safari 4.0.5 update. I looked at iStat Menus for temp and CPU. And I was seeing about 190 degrees F for CPU temp with lid closed running ext display. Also there was a constant usage of the cpu (about 30% User and 20% System). There's not one particular process I can see in Activity Monitor that acting out of the ordinary and using a lot of CPU. Just stuff like coreservicesd, WindowServer, launchd that are shuffling around and using about 1-4% of CPU.I ran repair disk permissions and verify disk. Verify Disk found errors and said I need to repair my Macintosh HD, which I have now done successfully.
I've been debating whether or not to upgrade my 3 year old 15" Macbook Pro that has a 2.2Ghz Core 2 Duo (Santa Rosa) to the new 13" 2.4Ghz Macbook Pro. FYI... My current system also has 4GB of RAM. Since both systems are Core 2 Duo, what kind of speed bump am I going to see? Would this be a substantial upgrade?
After waiting sometime for the refresh, I plunged to buying a 17" MBP. Now I'd assumed all along the way to sync data was well planned out, since many have a Mac and a MBP (in my case it's two MBPs). But after much Googling I'm left disappointed. I want my two MBPs in sync. If I drag and drop a file on one, I want that reflected on the other automatically and vice versa. Both will be on same LAN most of the time. Essentially one is left connected to a 24 inch LCD with wireless k/board and the other is left in living room and I expect to be able to interact with either and the changes will show up on the other (and vice versa). To handle iCal and AddressBook I went for MobileMe (and found it disappointing yet again, failing to work and costing relatively a lot). But the real problem is files. As the machines will not each change files whilst be on a different LAN I don't see why an Internet based sync is necessary, but I'm not entirely opposed. The more I look into syncing two Macs the more I'm surprised at the lack of robust solutions. I'm hoping I'm wrong and someone can tell me how easy it is. I imagined I'd use Chronosync but when I look at apps I use and what they say, (e.g. 1password, OmniFocus, DevonThink, Curio), they seem to recommend using the likes of DropBox. But DropBox is not a great sync tool and I only see it as good for limited number of files, besides I've got Gigs of stuff to keep in sync so it seems mad to be going via the cloud. (I looked into iTunes and ended up deciding on a network drive for it as my iPod will have what I want to listen to on the go.)
I've looked at some other posts that have gone over how to move files to an external drive, and they all say to use command while moving. I understand this copies the file and deletes the original, but when you make a copy and delete the original, you lose some of the original data, such as creation date, etc... This makes storage and organization more complicated than it has to be.
So I was informed by my uncle that he's retiring his first generation Core Duo 2.16GHz 17" MBP and was asking if I wanted it or not. He babied the system so it's nearly like new. Never took it outside, not even sure about the battery but that's not really a concern.
I want some owners of that laptop for some input to see how "useful" it is these days or should I refuse the offer?
If I were to take the system, it would most likely become by primary machine, basically what I use my MBA for right now. I understand the ram would be limited at 2GB, which is perfectly fine with me. The real advantage would be the hard drive, I can technically store a 1TB 5400RPM drive in there (which I would love to have... my 128GB is pretty limiting these days and carrying a 500GB external around everywhere is bit tiring too).
I look around for specs and so far I see that the 2.16GHz Core Duo and the current 2.13GHz Core 2 Duo in my MBA is more or less the same performance wise.
I guess what I'm really asking is, how well will this system put up for the next year or two. Pretty much, this will replace my MBA as a mobile workhouse. I originally planned on keeping this MBA for another 2 years (8 months right now) then replace to something new. But I'm becoming a bit limited on the disk space here and this seems like an upgrade to me.
i just got a 15" i7 w/ 4gb of ram, and since i might want to upgrade to 8, i went to the apple website and i see that they only offer 8gb available for sale? does this mean I will have to get 4GB somewhere else, or the new MBPs only offer 2 configurations (2x2GB or 2x4GB) and not 2 (2x2GB)s . I might sound confusing
I have a 15" i5 MBP and I've noticed that on these new machines OSX SL still defaults on 32-bit kernel (I think for third-party drivers compatibility issues)... My question is are there any benchmarks that shows if there are some performance gains forcing SL to boot with a 64-bit kernel? Which of the two kernels do you use?
I've been hearing about this for a while now and Ive read that MBPs should have quad core by February.
I've also read that this isn't going to happen for a little longer. What's everyone's thoughts on this?
I own a PC and would like to switch over (finally) but am concerned about the $400+ premium. My thought is wait until the new quad-core MBPs come out and just get a standard duo-core (hopefully MAC will drop the price a few hundred).
However, I don't want to wait much longer than 2 months. Thoughts? Suggestions?
Trying to use Expose but I have no idea where F8 is supposed to be, and hitting Function + 8 doesn't do anything. This is my first Mac since my Tiger OS first gen Macbook, and I'm slightly confused here.
I read some articles that stated the new 3x3 AEBS and TC were only capable of 300 Mbps, those reporta are wrong, I bought a new AEBS and have that setup as my new router and I have a new TC setup to extend my Wireless N network they are showing in the Airport Utility speeds between 400 and 450 Mbps look at the first device in the list.
I want to hook up two dell 24 monitors with my mbp santa rosa 2007 version( dvi not display port), is there any adapter that can split the single dvi port in mbp into two dvi ports ?
I just recently bought a NETGEAR WNR3500L 300Mbps + gigabit ethernet port. I keep hearing that my airport card should handle 300 Mbps just fine. But when I enable it on my netgear router settings my going to "Uo To 300Mbps" from default "Up to 150Mbps" I get horrible bandwidth...like 8Mbps. If i choose 150Mbps, everything opens up. I am going to figure out why 300Mbps mode isn't working.
I have a 2.2 GHz MacBook Pro (santa rosa) that I purchased in october of 2007 and I'm curious if the new Unibody MacBooks run noticeably cooler than this computer.
Any previous-gen MBP owners have Unibody MacBooks now and could offer some insight?
After I went home, I checked online and found all these horrid stories about how this HDD crashed after just a month, or two months, or even 2 weeks (there are like 10+ stories about this problem).
What bugs me more is that on the box it is actually written "Designed for Windows Vista" (which I didn't read before buying, a lesson I learned for future reference) so I'm afraid that it won't work that well on Mac OS X. I did find out that it works on Mac and I only need to format the drive, but I think, logically, if it works as well for Macs, why did they have to put a label that indicates it was designed for Windows?
I want to know this product IS that bad. I haven't opened the seal or the plastic at all, just in case everyone says it is that bad and I should to return it to the shop.
I'm using a 15" MBP (not the NEW MBP), Mac OS X v10.5.7
Has anybody tried the Moshi Cleargaurd on the new MBPs? Does it affect typing? Would the cover create any friction when typing? How about ventilation?
I would really apreciate it if someone could show me some pictures of actual usage, not just the photo on the Moshi website.
This is a fairly important question as I have read around these forums that the keys on the new MBPs get worn out really quickly, in the sense that the shine that appears on the black keys are really evident.
Can I get a quick survey of people who installed Intel X-25M and Firmware 1.7 on 2009 MBPs? Please mention if you had any problems or no problems at all.
I have a 2010 i7 MacBook Pro. I came across GeForce Mac OS X Driver Release 19.5.8 and CUDA 3.0 from the website: http://tonymacx86.blogspot.com/2010_06_01_archive.html(under Mac OS X 10.6.4 Update->What we know about 10.6.4 so far...)Is it advisable to install these drivers on the new 2010 MBP? I assume that whatever included in the official Mac OS/X update have been tested. If we download and install drivers from parts manufactures such as Nvidia, we risk possible untested, compatibility problems.
