[Kenstee]

From this post it looks doubtful that the new AL 15" will have 970's. But...who knows?



From powerpage.org....

"The PowerPage has received an interesting new update on the status of the long awaited Aluminum PowerBook 15-inch. The original TiBook has already migrated to its new Aluminum skin and is just waiting for the existing Titanium models to sell out. Word from a reliable source is that Apple has the new Aluminum PowerBook 15s already boxed and ready to go but is waiting for the existing models to disappear first. There was some delay because of a systems upgrade to the 15, but most of the bugs are out. (NO product ever ships without bugs.) The production lines in Taiwan have been severely impacted due to the spread of SARS so I'm not sure just how many will get to the shores in time for the sellout of all the TiBooks.

Could this mean that Steve will break his "no hardware announcements at WWDC" rule and show the aluminum PB15 at the new and improved SF Developer geekfest (23-27 June)? Or will the re-christened Macworld CreativePro Conference & Expo (14-18 July) be the host event? Sources say: too soon to tell.

Although the recently announced Apple Feature Presentation (16 July 9:30 am) screams New York, Apple will drop this one when they are good and ready. In the mean time keep your eyes peeled for some great fire sale promotions on existing PB15s either in the form of price drops or bundled with printers, memory and software."

[PoisonTooth]

I SERIOUSLY doubt Apple is going to release a PPC970-powered notebook before they address their tower woes. SERIOUSLY doubt it.

[cambro]

Exactly...Apple would be nuts not to rescue their languishing professional desktop machine.

The only questions is, when the PPC 970 does show up in desktops will it be a big enough leap to begin to close the performance gap (perceived, real, or otherwise)?

[PoisonTooth]

Originally posted by cambro:
Exactly...Apple would be nuts not to rescue their languishing professional desktop machine.

The only questions is, when the PPC 970 does show up in desktops will it be a big enough leap to begin to close the performance gap (perceived, real, or otherwise)?

I don't think even the PPC970 will beat Intel's juggernaut, but it will certainly get Apple back within spitting distance. The problem now is that the disparity is just too great to ignore.

[BrunoBruin]

If I had enough faith in these rumors I would be SOOOO tempted to get a new 1GHz Ti right now. If there's no new processor in the next revision I think I'd rather have the current case as well.

The other thing giving me pause is wondering if the new 15 might be slightly faster (IF Moto is shipping low-power chips at, say, 1.25GHz), and have the 167MHz bus like the 17.

Anyway, I don't think I buy this rumor. You can do a CTO Ti from the Apple Store with a 1-3 day ship time. To me, that says they are still coming off the assembly line.

[iWrite]

I disagree in the "disparity" scheme.

Intel is now going BACK to the Centrino chip schematic...

Which means LOWER speeds...

But INCREASED PERFORMANCE.

What I'm saying is that speed does not matter if you can do what you want and need to. As far as I'm concerned, the Macs certainly keep up with the PCs for all things that we do.

How fast DOES a word processor need to be?

How fast DOES a web browser need to be (especially with DSL)?

How fast DOES Photoshop need to be to render a page?

The only place where I see a real disparity is in the gaming sector and then the Macs don't keep up, period. But, honestly, we have an X-Box and we have Playstation 2, and our kids have Nintendo and we don't need our computers to play games with. In fact, I'm happy that the computers aren't good for gaming -- I don't want or need my kids gaming when there are other things they can do.

So, I think the speed issue is all relative and the Macs are neck-in-neck with all things Centrino. (At least in the Portables -- which is what we're discussing.)

[PoisonTooth]

Originally posted by iWrite:
I disagree in the "disparity" scheme.

Intel is now going BACK to the Centrino chip schematic...

Which means LOWER speeds...

But INCREASED PERFORMANCE.

What I'm saying is that speed does not matter if you can do what you want and need to. As far as I'm concerned, the Macs certainly keep up with the PCs for all things that we do.

How fast DOES a word processor need to be?

How fast DOES a web browser need to be (especially with DSL)?

How fast DOES Photoshop need to be to render a page?

The only place where I see a real disparity is in the gaming sector and then the Macs don't keep up, period. But, honestly, we have an X-Box and we have Playstation 2, and our kids have Nintendo and we don't need our computers to play games with. In fact, I'm happy that the computers aren't good for gaming -- I don't want or need my kids gaming when there are other things they can do.

So, I think the speed issue is all relative and the Macs are neck-in-neck with all things Centrino. (At least in the Portables -- which is what we're discussing.)

You disagree there's a massive speed disparity between Apple's current machines and the Banias (Pentium M) CPU. Do I understand you correctly? Because if I do, that's the silliest statement I've ever -- and I mean ever -- read on MacNN.

Just because YOU choose not to acknowledge it doesn't mean it's not there.

[iWrite]

I'm not saying that there isn't a disparity.

I'm saying that the current speeds in the Powerbooks are fine. They do what they need to do.

Let me ask you: Why do you need more speed? For what? For word processing? How fast can you type?

For web browsing? Do you use DSL?

For what? Why doesn't the current 1Ghz system "go" fast enough for you?

THAT is what I'm asking.

Now, if you need to render video then you'll need a PC, sure. If you need to play games then you'll need a PC. If you want to use autocad then you'll need a PC.

But, what I'm saying is that for most people, the current offerings are fine for right now.

We buy Macs for our employees/company because they love the ease of interface and the clean look and feel of both hardware and software. They're using it for sending photos back and forth to company headquarters (legal investigations) and posting to the online company legal site, emails, research, and of course, using MS Office for business purposes. For all of those things, the Mac offerings are fine for right now -- especially when on a fast (DSL/cable/T1) connection.

Yes, we use PCs but if you give someone a choice of a PC or a Mac for a desktop or portable system, they choose the Mac 9 times out of 10.

[TheIceMan]

iWrite:

While I do agree with you on some of your points, I would add that Mac users use their computers as much as PC users, if not more so. Mac users expect/demand that their computers would be able to do all or many of the things that their PC counterparts do. Because what good would buying a Mac if we are only using it for "word processing" and "web browsing"? Yes, some people only use their computers for these two things. But there are many more who use it extensively for everything from Audio/Video editing, programming, games, networking, and so on. Having a processor that can keep up with or exceed the demand of our uses would make a huge difference in the quality and productivity of people's life/work. Furthermore, Mac users pay as much or more for our computers so, yes, we do expect to "get what we pay for."

I LOVE my PowerBook and have loved it ever since switching from the PC last year. But as PoisonTooth said "The problem now is that the disparity is just too great to ignore." It is time for Apple to be "innovative" and close this gap.

[iWrite]

Well, apparently it's not going to happen right now.

Even Jobs pulled the plug on all things Mac over at Pixar and now his Pixar rendering farm has gone PC-based.

Yes, everyone wants faster, faster, faster and that's the way it seems to be.

However, I don't necessarily agree with or think it makes sense to adhere to Moore's Law.

I do think it would be nice to slap Mac OS X onto a P4 3.0Ghz chipset, but it's not happening right now for *whatever* reason.

After that I'll say that yes we buy the newest and fastest Mac technology when we can, but the truth is that I was working on an employee's beloved G3 500Mhz Pismo the other day and it was still remarkably fast. She won't give it up (we upgrade all Macs annually).

Anyway, I have nothing more to add. I'm not going to defend a slower chip and I'm not going to start jumping up and down ranting and raving about how Apple should have faster chips.

It's pointless to get worked up about it.

[PoisonTooth]

Originally posted by iWrite:
I'm not saying that there isn't a disparity.

You said: "I disagree in the "disparity" scheme."

Backpedal.

I'm saying that the current speeds in the Powerbooks are fine. They do what they need to do.

Fine for YOU. There is no doubt OSX is sluggish compared to Win 2K or XP on similar hardware on Apple's top-end portables. I know, I own both.

Let me ask you: Why do you need more speed?

Why NOT more speed? I find it very ironic that Mac users fall back on this position all the time, yet will be the first to bring up speed if, hypothetically, the next Apple CPU can top the best from Intel or AMD.

For what? For word processing? How fast can you type?

Office XP is FAR more responsive than Office v.X. In fact, Word v.X is a running joke among Mac users who have used the application enough to realize it's nowhere near as good as its Windows cousin.

Still, word processing is a very light-duty app. If that's all you want out of your machine, then a P2 333 would be just fine for you.

For web browsing? Do you use DSL?

Again, this is an easy task for a modern computer. It's *expected* that a modern computer will handle this with aplomb.

Why doesn't the current 1Ghz system "go" fast enough for you?

THAT is what I'm asking.

Application launches are slow. Menu response is sometimes sluggish. Window redraws are average at best. Startup times are horrible. Photoshop is slower. Video manipulation is not even close to competitive. Games are hopelessly behind the performance curve. Illustrator is a dog.

OSX, while an amazing, ultra-modern OS, is simply slower and slower-feeling than Windows XP on good x86 hardware.

OSX and the Mac have some tremendous strengths, but speed is NOT one of them.

But, what I'm saying is that for most people, the current offerings are fine for right now.

For most people, perhaps. For basic tasks, perhaps.

We buy Macs for our employees/company because they love the ease of interface and the clean look and feel of both hardware and software. They're using it for sending photos back and forth to company headquarters (legal investigations) and posting to the online company legal site, emails, research, and of course, using MS Office for business purposes. For all of those things, the Mac offerings are fine for right now -- especially when on a fast (DSL/cable/T1) connection.

That's fine. Agreed.

Yes, we use PCs but if you give someone a choice of a PC or a Mac for a desktop or portable system, they choose the Mac 9 times out of 10.

People all around the world have a choice between a Mac and Windows machine, and so far, Windows is creaming Mac. A 2.1% marketshare doesn't exactly jive with "9 out of 10 people" choosing Mac over PC notebooks. In fact, it illustrates quite the opposite.

9 times out of 10, the average Joe will pick a Windows machine, because he's familiar with the interface, software is readily available at a multitude of different outlets, and it's cheaper.

Like I said earlier, I think OSX and the Mac platform are amazing, but if you want to discuss speed and entrenchment, it's Windows all the way.

[BrunoBruin]

Hmmm, two whole posts before this thread got derailed into yet another MHz argument...

[kentuckyfried]

Why can't Apple just release 970 enabled towers and laptops at the same time?

[MusicalTone]

I really dont think Apple have plans to make a 15 AlBook any time soon and will only do so, if at all for the next processor upgrade cycle. They have said many a time that there are very happy with the Ti book and that no-body has topped it. Changing the Ti to Alu enclousure + AE and FW800 are not big enough reasons to bring out a new product. I have a feedling the 15 Ti will be shipping for many months to come.

[docholiday]

Originally posted by PoisonTooth:
I SERIOUSLY doubt Apple is going to release a PPC970-powered notebook before they address their tower woes. SERIOUSLY doubt it.

People here also doubted Apple was gonna release a 12" and a 17" G4 Powerbook when MacRumors posted it.

I guess only time will tell.

[docholiday]

Besides, didn't the G3 Powerbook come out roughly the same time the G3 Powermac came out?
Chances are low that the speeds of the PPC970 Powerbook will be as high as the Powermac speeds, but I would like to think that a PPC970 b/w 1.2-1.4 Ghz is possible and feasible (in terms of power usage and heat generation).

And once the PPC970 15" is out, you can be sure that the 17" model is gonna be released shortly after...

[mcs37]

Originally posted by PoisonTooth:
I don't think even the PPC970 will beat Intel's juggernaut, but it will certainly get Apple back within spitting distance. The problem now is that the disparity is just too great to ignore.

It's hard to compete with the upcoming 3.2 GHz P4 with HyperThreading, but the PPC970 will most certainly put Apple into range. If we can see a dual PPC 970 17" PowerBook come January (perhaps at 1.8 GHz each?), that's a pretty strong contender for me. But the PPC970 will at least put Apple into a strong position again.

[iDaver]

Please, no dual processors in laptops. They're hot enough already!

When the 970s are ready, I expect Apple will release both, new towers and PowerBooks just as soon as they can get them ready. The towers will probably come first though, since sales have been lagging.

Doesn't Apple make about the same amount of money on a PowerBook as they do on a PowerMac? Why would they want to put 970s only in PowerMacs?...unless there's some kind of technological reason for holding back the portables.

[kentuckyfried]

^ My sentiments exactly.

The advantage of having a desktop is that it's more expandable. The advantage of the laptop is portability.


It makes the most sense to release both at the same time. That's why it would be a a great intro with the 15" Al and bring true meaning to the words "Year of the laptop." =)

[tooki]

Originally posted by Kenstee:
From this post it looks doubtful that the new AL 15" will have 970's.

Sorry to be blunt, but: No shit, Sherlock!

Never mind that that quote is from O'Grady's PowerPage (which is less reliable than a 1979 Dodge or a late-80's Hyundai Excel), there is no way Apple would release a PPC970-based PowerBook while leaving the G4 towers behind. PowerBooks have traditionally been, at best, at the same performance level as the desktop machines (this was back when the beige G3 was towards the end of its life, and the Wallstreet PowerBooks had essentially identical performance). At best, Apple will update the PowerBooks at the same time as the towers; more realistically, a year later.

tooki

[Hornet]

Whoever thinks the Al15 rev A that is shipping any time soon (<2 months) will have a 970 is on a life threatening amount of crack

Lets look at what the Al15 may bring, if it is to come soon.. ie before the whole line is revised.

- The same 1ghz processor

- A larger screen (15.4") with a lower resolution (1280x800) if rumors are to be believed. ie, 2.6% more screen SIZE - with 6.4% LESS workspace on screen. If the 15.4 should have a screen res around 2.6% more to keep in line . In other words, a downgrade will happen

- Nvidia Geforce 440 Go. What a downgrade this will be... not only a slower card (see UT2k3 mac benchmark thread for more on this), but *no* support for pixel and vertex shaders. I guarentee you, this will exclude this system from future enhancements to OSX - possibly even as early as panther (Quartz Exxxtreme 2, now with pixel and vertex shader routines). There is an interesting discussion going on at arstechnica about future enhancements to Quartz Extreme - offloading more CPU work to the GPU (with the eventual goal of full Quartz 2D acceleration down the track). This will all have to be done with pixel and vertex shaders - which the Geforce 4 Go 420/440/460 do not support.

- A new design. Should look quite nice, but expect this to have a whole raft of "rev a" issues. Just a warning to those out there who want to buy a rev a machine. Just look at the issues the Al12 had (not saying anything bad about the Al12 - every apple rev a product ends up having quite a few problems - it is to be expected - so, consider that).

On the better side of things: Firewire 800, airport extreme, and probably DDR ram with an architecture system similar to that of the 17.


Every day that goes by, is another day of lessening chance that apple will revise the 15 before it does the whole line. I believe they want to keep the revisions in sync with each other. Especially considering the 15 cant jump to 1.2ghz or something while the 17 sits at 1.0.

Realistically, I predict the following:

No 970 in the powerbooks for the next revisoin. That cant be stressed enough - "No **** sherlock" as Tooki said

- 1.2ghz G4 in the 15 and 17
- 17" style architecture (DDR memory etc) across the board
- Radeon 9600 in the 15 and 17 (possibly in the 12 in a slower clocked/32MB VRAM version) - with pixel and vertex shader - which would be a *MUCH* better choice than the nvidia geforce 440 go.
- Release: July-Sept.

Think. Apple cant make the 15 jump before the 17 does. Apple cant make the 17 jump until it has been around for about 6 months. The 17 was vaporware released five months ago, however only really released/shipped what, 3, months ago? 2.5? 3 months from now sounds realistic for a product wide update.

And 970 laptops 12 months after 970 desktops - mid to late 2004.


Edit: wow admins can swear without astericks

[Eug]

I'm saying that the current speeds in the Powerbooks are fine. They do what they need to do.

I always love the Apple apologists. I scrapped my 1 year old iBook, because it was too slow. I went for a GHz TiBook. The speeds are "fine" for every day type stuff, but they are certainly far from ideal. Even Office X and Keynote feel slow at times. Some of this is due to the software itself, but a faster CPU certainly would help.

And remember that the TiBook SD is for burning DVDs. Have you ever tried to make DVDs? The 1X DVD-R burn speed is bad enough. Add to that the massive video encoding times. For this purpose I wouldn't even consider the GigaBooks "fine".

Anyways, back on topic...

I would be VERY surprised if the new 15.4" AluBook came with a PPC 970 any time soon. One big problem is the fact that there is a significant power output issue. While a 1.2 to 1.4 GHz PPC 970 would not be completely unreasonable to use, a 1.8 GHz PPC 970 would draw far too much power. Furthermore, if (and it's a big "if") Motorola is able to scale the 0.13 u MPC7457 G4 chips up to 1.4 GHz by the end of this year, then I'd say Apple would be more inclined to use the G4 instead of the PPC 970. How 1.4 GHz of a 7457 would compare to 1.4 GHz of a PPC 970 is anybody's guess, but at this level power concerns become much more relevant.

And people, stop with the dual processor laptop business. If a dual 1.8 GHz PPC 970 PowerBook appeared, I'd tell people to immediately sell their Apple stock. That would mark the beginning of the end for Apple. It'd use even more CPU power than a 3 GHz desktop P4 and would simply be an act of despair. I don't see dual laptops until somebody invents a 10 Watt 3 GHz CPU or something.

[neutrino23]

Originally posted by Hornet:
...
Realistically, I predict the following:

No 970 in the powerbooks for the next revisoin. That cant be stressed enough - "No **** sherlock" as Tooki said

- 1.2ghz G4 in the 15 and 17
- 17" style architecture (DDR memory etc) across the board
- Radeon 9600 in the 15 and 17 (possibly in the 12 in a slower clocked/32MB VRAM version) - with pixel and vertex shader - which would be a *MUCH* better choice than the nvidia geforce 440 go.
- Release: July-Sept.

Think. Apple cant make the 15 jump before the 17 does. Apple cant make the 17 jump until it has been around for about 6 months. The 17 was vaporware released five months ago, however only really released/shipped what, 3, months ago? 2.5? 3 months from now sounds realistic for a product wide update.

And 970 laptops 12 months after 970 desktops - mid to late 2004.

The release of the next 15 inch PB is a puzzle. The current Ti Book is already >6 months old. In recent history Apple has upgraded laptops after six months or so. Therefore, it should come out about now.

If it comes out now then I think it will have the same specs as the 17 inch Al PB. A speed bump would be nice but there is no indication that Motorola has a faster, low power chip to use for this purpose. This would seem to argue for a delay until the fall when a faster, low power G4 is expected. However, a full year without a change to the main PB seems too long.

Then there is the 970. As many have argued, it would be prudent of Apple to first put the 970 in the towers, get a few months experience with it in the field, then put it in a laptop. On the other hand, you have to think that Apple has had well over a year to plan for this date and to test 970 prototypes. It would really make a splash if they announced both a 15 inch laptop and a tower in June.

to review the options:
1. Update the 15 inch PB very soon with the same specs as the 17 inch but perhaps with the newly announced Radeon 9600 GPU.

2. Wait till much later in the year when the next 7457 G4 is released.

3. Make a big splash in June with a 970 based PB.

Personally, I'm voting for option 1 and hoping for option 3. I can't imagine going a full year or more without a change to the 15 inch PB as required by option 2.

[PoisonTooth]

Originally posted by Eug:
I always love the Apple apologists. I scrapped my 1 year old iBook, because it was too slow. I went for a GHz TiBook. The speeds are "fine" for every day type stuff, but they are certainly far from ideal. Even Office X and Keynote feel slow at times. Some of this is due to the software itself, but a faster CPU certainly would help.

And remember that the TiBook SD is for burning DVDs. Have you ever tried to make DVDs? The 1X DVD-R burn speed is bad enough. Add to that the massive video encoding times. For this purpose I wouldn't even consider the GigaBooks "fine".

Anyways, back on topic...

I would be VERY surprised if the new 15.4" AluBook came with a PPC 970 any time soon. One big problem is the fact that there is a significant power output issue. While a 1.2 to 1.4 GHz PPC 970 would not be completely unreasonable to use, a 1.8 GHz PPC 970 would draw far too much power. Furthermore, if (and it's a big "if") Motorola is able to scale the 0.13 u MPC7457 G4 chips up to 1.4 GHz by the end of this year, then I'd say Apple would be more inclined to use the G4 instead of the PPC 970. How 1.4 GHz of a 7457 would compare to 1.4 GHz of a PPC 970 is anybody's guess, but at this level power concerns become much more relevant.

And people, stop with the dual processor laptop business. If a dual 1.8 GHz PPC 970 PowerBook appeared, I'd tell people to immediately sell their Apple stock. That would mark the beginning of the end for Apple. It'd use even more CPU power than a 3 GHz desktop P4 and would simply be an act of despair. I don't see dual laptops until somebody invents a 10 Watt 3 GHz CPU or something.

Eug, you get it. Kudos to your impartial analysis. You're spot-on.

[iDaver]

I'm by no means a chip expert but I thought I read somewhere that the PPC 970 would draw less power and put out less heat than the G4.

Not true?

[chrisutley]

Apple is not going to sit on inventory of boxed PB's very long. I wouldn't be surprised if they just released them on a Tuesday with a press release and that's about it. This is assuming the rumors are true of course...

[neutrino23]

I went back and read the original post and found two odd things.

One is that it says the powerbooks are already boxed up and ready to go. If this was the case you would expect various sales and promotions going on to clear the channel of the Ti book. This is not the case. Also, it is expensive for Apple to hold inventory.

Second, SARS is affecting mostly Taiwanese hospitals, not factories. Also, if there was an effect on the factories it would affect all the powerbooks, not just the new 15 inch AL PB.

In spite of the numerous reports I think we are still in the dark on this. I just hope they come out soon. I'm ready to get one as soon as they come out.

[theolein]

I just posted somewhere else that I just recently bought a 667 MHz TiBook, although I already own a Dell 8200 1.8GHz Laptop. Why, you ask? Because of the feel of a Mac, both in OS9 and in OSX. Things are incredibly well integrated. The software doesn't feel disjointed the way iit does in Windows. The resolution is optimal compared to the absolutely bullshit 1600x1200 Resolution of the Dell (why not just stick my eyes out with red hot needles, it's less painful). I have Unix in spite of what those ****heads at SCO say, and a free and good IDE.

The Dell is far faster than my TiBook, and Office is much quicker there, and interestingly is also, along with Explorer the only application that is integrated in the OS instead of bolted on. But it's a pain to use and I have no use whatsoever for all that speed. It's simply a waste. WindowsXP is very robust, but having to work with Microsoft's idea of application organistaion (how many dialog boxes does networking need anyway?) is tiring.

The 970 will come and Apple will catch up to a certain extent again, which is important in the market, but the thnig that makes a Mac a Mac is the fact that the whole computer and OS are part of a single, whole integrated concept. This is where Apple shines and where their strength lies.

Viva mi Mac!

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by iDaver:
I'm by no means a chip expert but I thought I read somewhere that the PPC 970 would draw less power and put out less heat than the G4.

Not true?

True, at the same clock speed.

The 970 will possibly debut at 1.8 GHz, which is nearly twice the highest clock speed available in Apple laptops.

This is, however, a very new chip. One of the toughest things to do is to optimize a chip and supporting architectures for full integration, power management, etc. This is precisely what sets apart Apple's laptops from nearly all lower-priced, and most similarly-priced competitors.

It also means that you won't see a processor in an Apple laptop until at least a generation later.

At least, that's the way it's been so far.

-s*

[Eug]

Originally posted by iDaver:
I'm by no means a chip expert but I thought I read somewhere that the PPC 970 would draw less power and put out less heat than the G4.

Not true?

IBM PPC 970 typical power usage: 1.8 MHz = 42 W, 1.2 MHz = 19 W

Motorola MPC7455 typical power usage: 1.0 MHz = 15 W (and 22 W max)

It looks like the PPC 970 might be higher power even at the same MHz, despite the fact that it was created on the 0.13 um process. It's no wonder that the 0.18 um 7455 has received so many kudos from the embedded types.

I suspect the Motorola MPC7457 will be even lower power than the 7455 MHz for MHz, and thus will have better power specs than the PPC 970 for use at 1.0+ GHz speeds in a PowerBook.

It's true the PPC 970 overall would likely be faster than the 7457 at the same MHz, but any improvement on the PowerBook speeds would be welcome. ie. A 7457 would be sufficient for a PowerBook upgrade, and might actually be preferred because of its lower power despite the lower MHz for MHz speed.

EDIT:

Motorola MPC7457 typical power usage: 1.3 GHz = 18.7 MHz

Hmmm... So the power chars of the 0.13 um 7457 are a somewhat better than the PPC 970, but not monstrously better.

Interestingly, the power usage is 15.3 W typical at 1 GHz, which is similar to the 0.18 um 7455. Hmmm...

[Eug]

P.S. THE MPC7457 is "Footprint compatible with MPC7455 and MPC7445 processors."

ie. The AluBook just needs a drop-in of the new chip. No architecture change at all.

[seanyepez]

Yeah, but the aluminum, 15-inch PowerBook isn't going to use PC-133 SDRAM.

[Simon]

Originally posted by Eug:
EDIT:

Motorola MPC7457 typical power usage: 1.3 GHz = 18.7 MHz

Damn Eug, that's quite some intersting mathematics you got there.

Information about speed, power, cache etc. of the 74xx Moto chips can be found here. Unfortunately they haven't updated the 7457 data yet.

[Eug]

Oops, that should be 1.3 GHz = 18.7 Watts. All the stuff is already published. See here. They just haven't updated that other page you linked.

Yeah, but the aluminum, 15-inch PowerBook isn't going to use PC-133 SDRAM.

Huh? So what's your point?

I'm just saying that although they've built their AluBooks around the 7455, it's no big change to use the 7457. ie. The new 17" would simply drop in a new chip, and the new 15" would be similar in design to the 17".

Too bad that DDR is only gonna run like SDR with that 7457. It'll take yet another new chip, the 7457-RM, before DDR can be properly utilized. (Or else they could jump to PPC 970 for some serious bandwidth action.)

[iWrite]

You guys have me laughing this morning.

SO much speculation.

Haven't you learned YET that Apple will do something that you'll NEVER expect?

Everyone wants to beat the heck out of the 970 PPC theory and maybe you're right, but if you're WRONG and Apple DOES release the new Powerbook with a 970 you are all going to feel like the biggest idiots around for basically telling everyone else that they're stupid.

Me, I don't claim to know. I don't even PRETEND to know.

Strictly from a logical point of view, I will say that I very seriously doubt that Apple is putting PPC 970 in their 15-inch system UNLESS Apple is going to put it into the 17-inch system also. Since the 17-inch system is their gravy machine and is not designed for PPC and is a new machine, it makes no sense that Apple will put 970 in their 15-inch system because masses of people will run out to buy the 15-inch system and 17-inch sales will plummet.

Apple will not sabotage their 17-inch sales.

There will be a 15-inch system announced and Apple will change their advertising to reflect THREE aluminum Powerbooks.

They may have a minor upgrade for the 17-inch systems also, so that the 17-inch systems do not look lackluster.

I predict that the 17-inch system will be speed-bumped in order to keep people lusting after it.

Now, this is the question: How many of YOU veteran Titanium owners are going to go out and buy the new 15-inch system?

[Powaqqatsi]

Originally posted by iWrite:
Now, this is the question: How many of YOU veteran Titanium owners are going to go out and buy the new 15-inch system?

Not me, I hate the new design. Maybe it has better build quality but I think they are ugly and I can't stand the uncovered ports ON THE SIDE.

[Eug]

Originally posted by iWrite:
SO much speculation.

Everyone wants to beat the heck out of the 970 PPC theory and maybe you're right, but if you're WRONG and Apple DOES release the new Powerbook with a 970 you are all going to feel like the biggest idiots around for basically telling everyone else that they're stupid.

Me, I don't claim to know. I don't even PRETEND to know.

Strictly from a logical point of view, I will say that I very seriously doubt that Apple is putting PPC 970 in their 15-inch system UNLESS Apple is going to put it into the 17-inch system also.
Apple will not sabotage their 17-inch sales.

There will be a 15-inch system announced and Apple will change their advertising to reflect THREE aluminum Powerbooks.I predict that the 17-inch system will be speed-bumped in order to keep people lusting after it.

Now, this is the question: How many of YOU veteran Titanium owners are going to go out and buy the new 15-inch system?

Uh, this is a speculation thread. Hence we're speculating just like you are.

I just happen to think that neither will have the PPC 970. And contrary to what you may think, if I'm wrong I'll be VERY happy. Furthermore, just about nobody is arguing PPC 970 in the 15" without PPC 970 in the 17". It's a given that if the 15" AluBook appears with a PPC 970 that the 17" will also need one.

However, the question is with what chip will the bump occur. Most of us here think it won't be the PPC 970. It's possible it might be the 7455, but it's also possible it would be the new 7457, which should scale higher than the 7455. (It's amazing that the 7455 has already reached 1.42 GHz, but that's really pushing the design. Motorola doesn't even advertise chips over 1 GHz.) However, the problem is when the 7457 will be shipping in large volumes. The schedule suggested that it wouldn't be until a little later, but who knows, perhaps Apple has gotten its grubby little hands on some large shipments already.

BTW, I won't upgrade my TiBook 1 GHz, until I get at least a 50% or preferably a 100% speed upgrade. I never upgrade for 25% speed bumps, unless there are other compelling reasons to do so.

[jindrich]

everybody is expecting 970 throughout the line.

current towers are a joke. 3x times the price and 1/3 of the perfomance of comparable wintels (dont start into the windows blah blah crap: photoshop, illustrator, maya, afterfx, nuendo... they are THE SAME app regardless of OS).

if apple releases towers with 970, every possible powerbook customer will wait till 970 gets into the Alus. Which means there will be NO SALES of powerbook till then.

Apple has no other choice but to release towers and powerbooks with 970 by september.

and then the stock will return back to 35 by end of year (when imusic shop will be on windows). i'm very tempted.

[iWrite]

I don't think Apple will wait until September to upgrade the Powerbook line, especially the 15-inch systems, but who knows.

I've been checking out the various resellers and contrary to what has been said, there are NO sales on Titaniums anywhere other than the standard promos such as $50 back, free ram, free shipping, etc.

So, I'm not so sure that a new system is imminent.

I'm going to dig around more to see what I can find about new 15-inch systems -- aside from the "usual suspects" such as Think Secret, Mac Rumors, Mac Whispers, etc.

[BrunoBruin]

Originally posted by iWrite:
Since the 17-inch system is their gravy machine and is not designed for PPC and is a new machine, it makes no sense that Apple will put 970 in their 15-inch system because masses of people will run out to buy the 15-inch system and 17-inch sales will plummet....Now, this is the question: How many of YOU veteran Titanium owners are going to go out and buy the new 15-inch system?

I'm starting to come around to the arguments of those who say that Apple has to do as much as it can as fast as it can. If that means getting the 970 into 15-inch PowerBooks and letting sales of the 17 suffer for a few months, so be it. This transition period can't be predicted based on recent revisions, because we're not just talking about speed bumps.

You could also look at it this way: when the 970 is introduced in the towers, PowerBook sales are going to drop anyway because we'll all be sitting here waiting for the 970 to migrate to the laptops. It's like the current 15-inch Ti; a lot of people are holding off on buying because they KNOW a revision is coming and they're just waiting for the other aluminum shoe to drop. Who's going to buy a $3,300 17-inch PowerBook when there are 970 towers shipping and it's just a matter of time before the PB is updated? Better for Apple to have one 970 laptop than none.

If the new 15s don't ship with the 970 and if the only difference is the case, I will buy a closeout 1GHz Ti. I don't care for the looks of the aluminum cases, and if they're still at 1GHz... pffft.

EDIT: jindrich beat me to the point about 970 towers killing laptop sales!

[iWrite]

Well, I've been doing some research over in the Asian business/electronics sector and find nothing interesting about Quanta and what they're making for Apple right now. They did mention that they're going to start production for LCD touch technology for cell phones of all things (you can scroll through the menu on your cell phone by using your fingers).

That much said, I did find this interesting article and it mentions that Apple is going to (gulp) use recycled aluminum cans for the aluminum in the aluminum Powerbooks.

Of course, it's all speculation, but the truth is that aluminum IS a much cheaper material than Titanium. Also, I've heard reports that the aluminum systems DO NOT dissipate heat nearly as well as the Titanium systems and that the only reason Apple moved to aluminum was because of the amount of paint problems with the Titanium systems -- or all Powerbooks would still be Titanium.

Kind of makes sense.

With that much said, I'm thinking that the 1Ghz Titanium is going to beome a classic like the G4 Cube 500Mhz. Can't find those systems nowadays -- everyone wants them on eBay -- and their prices are amazing (all G4 Cubes are STILL expensive and have become a kind of cult item amongst Apple aficionados -- we have one that is boxed up and we don't use it because I don't want anything happenening to it). I think the 1Ghz Titanium will eventually fall into that "classic" category and they'll hold their value.

With that much said, I'm not so sure that I even want an aluminum 15-inch system simply for the sake of getting aluminum. If all else under the hood remains the same, why upgrade?

[Eug]

Also, I've heard reports that the aluminum systems DO NOT dissipate heat nearly as well as the Titanium systems and that the only reason Apple moved to aluminum was because of the amount of paint problems with the Titanium systems -- or all Powerbooks would still be Titanium.

Dunno about that, since aluminum is the most common metal used for CPU heatsinks. My guess the main reason is simply cost, and the fact that they now can actually do it.

(To make aluminum as strong as Titanium it needs to be thicker. Perhaps in the old days they didn't have the proper or inexpensive enough alloys or the proper techniques for using aluminum in such a thin form factor.)

It's all moot now though, since AluBooks are already here.

[neutrino23]

Originally posted by iWrite:

Of course, it's all speculation, but the truth is that aluminum IS a much cheaper material than Titanium. Also, I've heard reports that the aluminum systems DO NOT dissipate heat nearly as well as the Titanium systems and that the only reason Apple moved to aluminum was because of the amount of paint problems with the Titanium systems -- or all Powerbooks would still be Titanium.

I don't have information for the specific alloys used but Al conducts heat roughly ten times better than Ti. Ti is stronger but we are not building bridges here. Slightly thicker Al can be used to obtain the needed strength. The Al Books I checked at MWSF seemed very stiff. No problem with strength for those prototypes.

FYI, the best heat conductor, Cu , conducts heat about 15 times better than Ti. I guess that it is not used in heat sinks because of the weight and possibility of corrosion.

These numbers depend somewhat on the alloy. Adding small amounts of other metals can improve strength or scratch resistance but diminish thermal conductivity.

[Simon]

Originally posted by neutrino23:
FYI, the best heat conductor, Cu , conducts heat about 15 times better than Ti. I guess that it is not used in heat sinks because of the weight and possibility of corrosion.

Actually, the new MDD PowerMacs have Cu heatsinks. It is heavy like hell. Now idea about corrosion. Haven't heard negative reports yet. Maybe some alloy?

[seanyepez]

Copper conducts heat well, but it doesn't dissipate it as quickly as aluminum does.

[Eug]

FYI, the best heat conductor, Cu , conducts heat about 15 times better than Ti. I guess that it is not used in heat sinks because of the weight and possibility of corrosion.

Copper is very commonly used in heatsinks, as others have mentioned. I think the main problem is it's very expensive and as Sean mentioned, it supposedly doesn't dissipate heat as well.

To get around this, some heatsinks have a copper base and aluminum fins. Saves money, and you get the best heat characteristics of both worlds.

[SEkker]

I think Apple went with Al because the fit and finish on these machines is MUCH better in my opinion than the TiPB. Cost may be a factor, but the AL is simply better.

[Simon]

Originally posted by SEkker:
I think Apple went with Al because the fit and finish on these machines is MUCH better in my opinion than the TiPB. Cost may be a factor, but the AL is simply better.

I agree.

Ti might have been a very nice material, but it needed paint. That was bad. It needed a carbon frame which needed paint and glue. That was bad too. Look at the paint blisters and the scratches. That's not acceptable for Apple's top of the line portable. Mac users expect more.

I always thought the Ti looked very nice and professional. But since I've worked with the 12" and 17" I think the Ti looks kind of cheap (no offense to Ti owners intended here ). The light beige frame, the darker Ti and then the very dark but semi-transparent PLASTIC keyboard (I know the new ones have plastic keys too, but they look like metal and aren't semi-transparent) just don't cut it. The sleek one-color AlBooks look way more professional and "cleaner".

I'm very glad Apple went for Al.