Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Hardware - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Mac Notebooks > Chose Powerbook over Macbook

Chose Powerbook over Macbook
Thread Tools
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: London
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 28, 2006, 06:33 PM
 
http://forums.macnn.com/66/ibook-and...t/#post3252114

I've come in for some ridicule on the iBook forum for choosing a Powerbook G4 over a Macbook. I bought a black Macbook which was dead on arrival. After getting a refund I bought a 15inch PB G4 for the same price, £999. Given that I won't demand much of the machine beyond e-mail, Internet and perhaps some light photo work (with jpegs from an old 3MP Leica digital camera) I thought it was a reasonable deal, particularly as the PB was new, not refurb or ex display, and came with a 2 year warranty. Even my old G3 iBook performed most tasks at a tolerable speed, so I cannot imagine why going from that to a 1.67 Ghz G4 could be considered a duff move. What is this obsession with speed? Surely for the vast majority of consumer users these periodic speed bumps are not going to make a great deal of difference?

I must admit though, after getting the DOA Macbook I was dissuaded from having another one after reading various horror stories online. It seems to me the Macbook is still having teething trouble whereas that PB I've ended up with represents a product at its peak.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Memphis, Tn. USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 28, 2006, 08:39 PM
 
I still use over 8 G4 PBs. I don't yet need a MacBook! I don't play games or render video! I would have to buy new software to take true advantage of speed break. Refurb 17" PBs go for almost as much as refurb 15" Macbooks from Apple.

Someday I will upgrade my gaggle of PBs but I feel no need at present time!
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Circa 1225, from the Old French
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 28, 2006, 08:44 PM
 
sorry your intel mac experiences suck, but they are overall quality machines.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Memphis, Tn. USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 28, 2006, 11:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by Blasphemy View Post
sorry your intel mac experiences suck, but they are overall quality machines.
Still, a lot of people upgrade to have latest and greatest computers!
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 28, 2006, 11:19 PM
 
Originally Posted by romeosc View Post
Still, a lot of people upgrade to have latest and greatest computers!
Perhaps, but how many people -- when paying the same price -- choose a computer with a processor which is obsolete by a year (and arguably for a lot longer than that since the G4 'Books where released in 2001).

I can see choosing a PowerBook because of screen size, PC Card slot, or graphics card, but a G4 over a Core Duo? After upgrading from an Aluminum and seriously can not believe how bad PowerBook users had it for so long with the G4.
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: New Windsor, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 28, 2006, 11:39 PM
 
my mother has a macbook, and i have a 1.67ghz apb, i use both, and i cannot really tell the difference between the two, if you optimize your system the right way then there isnt too much of a difference, im not saying that is NOT a difference, but what i am saying is that there is not enough of a difference for me to sell my powerbook for a macbook, and im waiting for kinks to get ironed out of the pro series before i even think about it.
     
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 28, 2006, 11:56 PM
 
If you're planning on having the machine for many years, it might of been a better choice going intel. Who knows if PPCs will be supported after 10.5. For that matter, who knows if G4s will be powerful enough or G5s will be the baseline. I think in some respects you made a smart move and in some a not so smart move. Anyways, good luck with the machine. I hope it works out for you!
MacBook Pro | 2.16 Ghz CD | 100 Gb HD | 2 Gb RAM | 10.4
iBook Clamshell | 466 Mhz | 60 Gb HD | 576 Mb RAM | 10.4
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Los Angeles of the East
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2006, 01:26 AM
 
g4's will be supported by apple for years to come...look how long they kept the g3's around. thats not what you should be worried about, if its suited for your uses go for it...but you might regret this purchase in about a year and a half when your powerbook cant handle the new software out. g5's are already choking on the new photoshop while intel machines are smashing it...who knows how g4's handle it
NOW YOU SEE ME! 2.4 MBP and 2.0 MBP (running ubuntu)
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: New Windsor, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2006, 02:00 AM
 
Originally Posted by iREZ View Post
g4's will be supported by apple for years to come...look how long they kept the g3's around. thats not what you should be worried about, if its suited for your uses go for it...but you might regret this purchase in about a year and a half when your powerbook cant handle the new software out. g5's are already choking on the new photoshop while intel machines are smashing it...who knows how g4's handle it
i use many hi power apps on my 1.67ghz without any hitches. Just take a look at my dock
  1. Shake
  2. Aperture
  3. Final Cut Studio
  4. Handbrake
  5. Photoshop CS
  6. Image Ready CS

( Last edited by cbrfanatic; Dec 29, 2006 at 02:08 AM. )
     
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2006, 02:59 AM
 
Originally Posted by iREZ View Post
g4's will be supported by apple for years to come...look how long they kept the g3's around. thats not what you should be worried about, if its suited for your uses go for it...but you might regret this purchase in about a year and a half when your powerbook cant handle the new software out. g5's are already choking on the new photoshop while intel machines are smashing it...who knows how g4's handle it
fact: older machines will begin to drag on the newest software and operating systems. it's apple's way of getting us to buy new computers. a solution no one seems to think of is "don't run the newest software". think twice about upgrading to the latest and greatest everything. a lot of people are complaining about itunes 7 and i bet most of them upgraded "just because it was there". while there is no doubt that a macbook is a technologically superior machine, has better wireless, and much faster there are many advantages of a g4 powerbook. maybe he wants to run classic apps, enjoys a bigger screen, doesn't like the glossy finish, prefers an internal modem, likes the way it looks more (i can't imagine that), or has software that isn't or barely is intel compatible. maybe he doesn't want to install a ton of memory just to run said apps. you guys caught me on a bad day, i turned chicken and sold 400 shares of apple stock today. (still got some though).
imac g3 600
imac g4 800 superdrive
ibook 466
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Los Angeles of the East
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2006, 03:39 AM
 
i think i may have worded it wrong...

a g4 is great for now...

a g4 will be great a year or two from now if the user doesnt upgrade software.

a g4 will be lots slower in a year or two from now when running the newest software available as oppose to a macbook pro.
NOW YOU SEE ME! 2.4 MBP and 2.0 MBP (running ubuntu)
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Alabama
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2006, 06:09 AM
 
I chose a 12" refurb PB over a macbook and have been extremely happy...I need to update my sig. though.
PowerMac G4-733mhz-Quicksilver | 5th gen. iPod-Video-30gb-White. | Pentax *istDS DSLR
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Houston
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2006, 08:55 AM
 
Hey man, this is YOUR life. So what if some people think you made a big mistake. YOU are the one that has got to use the machine, and it will not be obsolete for several more years.

Enjoy it!
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Houston
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2006, 09:01 AM
 
Originally Posted by cbrfanatic View Post
my mother has a macbook, and i have a 1.67ghz apb, i use both, and i cannot really tell the difference between the two, if you optimize your system the right way then there isnt too much of a difference, im not saying that is NOT a difference, but what i am saying is that there is not enough of a difference for me to sell my powerbook for a macbook, and im waiting for kinks to get ironed out of the pro series before i even think about it.
I have a buddy that bought a MBP and he hates it. Even after upgrading to 2GBs of memory, he feels that it is not as fast as they claimed. I have a 17" CD MBP at work and it is maxed out as well, and to be honest it is not 'smoking' fast.

Yes, it is faster than my 15" 1.33Ghz PB but it is not insanely faster as the commercials would have you believe.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Memphis, Tn. USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2006, 10:31 AM
 
Originally Posted by houstonmacbro View Post
I have a buddy that bought a MBP and he hates it. Even after upgrading to 2GBs of memory, he feels that it is not as fast as they claimed. I have a 17" CD MBP at work and it is maxed out as well, and to be honest it is not 'smoking' fast.

Yes, it is faster than my 15" 1.33Ghz PB but it is not insanely faster as the commercials would have you believe.
Most people don't really need the speed.... they just want to keep up with the Jones.... Games are the majority reason for speed!
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Houston
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2006, 10:37 AM
 
Yeah ... sadly. And if I wanted to game (which I don't) I would buy a game console built for it.
     
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Boston, MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2006, 10:41 AM
 
I agree with some of the others in this thread... a G4 is *not* obsolete by any means...

Not to mention, with Leopard coming out... it includes many improvements by being coded in Obj-C 2.0. Resource usage is much better with things like garbage cleanup. I've heard various reports that say currently, Leopard runs better on G3s than Tiger does...
     
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2006, 12:09 PM
 
I didn't say a G4 is not going to be supported any time soon. All I've heard is that the PPC line will most likely NOT be supported by 10.6. It's just so hard to tell how future applications are going to run on PPC chips..
MacBook Pro | 2.16 Ghz CD | 100 Gb HD | 2 Gb RAM | 10.4
iBook Clamshell | 466 Mhz | 60 Gb HD | 576 Mb RAM | 10.4
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: New Windsor, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2006, 01:54 PM
 
......dang, no compliments on my dock, lol.


anywho, i love my G4
     
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2006, 01:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by Tipo View Post
I agree with some of the others in this thread... a G4 is *not* obsolete by any means...

Not to mention, with Leopard coming out... it includes many improvements by being coded in Obj-C 2.0. Resource usage is much better with things like garbage cleanup. I've heard various reports that say currently, Leopard runs better on G3s than Tiger does...
hmmmmmmm. now this would be nice to see.
imac g3 600
imac g4 800 superdrive
ibook 466
     
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2006, 02:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by gooser View Post
hmmmmmmm. now this would be nice to see.
I can't wait to see this also.
MacBook Pro | 2.16 Ghz CD | 100 Gb HD | 2 Gb RAM | 10.4
iBook Clamshell | 466 Mhz | 60 Gb HD | 576 Mb RAM | 10.4
     
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Silicone Valley, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2006, 04:27 PM
 
Just wondering if the reason your buddy and you don't feel like the MBP's are that fast might have to do what apps you're running???

I don't have an IntelMac yet, but my understanding is that where they're 'smoking fast' is when they're running one of the newly compiled Universal apps....

I just read somewhere else today that some tests with the new PhotoShop beta (compiled as Universal...) was smoked the other versions....

Just a thought....


Originally Posted by houstonmacbro View Post
I have a buddy that bought a MBP and he hates it. Even after upgrading to 2GBs of memory, he feels that it is not as fast as they claimed. I have a 17" CD MBP at work and it is maxed out as well, and to be honest it is not 'smoking' fast.

Yes, it is faster than my 15" 1.33Ghz PB but it is not insanely faster as the commercials would have you believe.
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Houston
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2006, 05:02 PM
 
For now, just basic Apple-tuned apps and browsers (Garageband, Firefox, Safari, etc.)
     
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 31, 2006, 12:53 AM
 
The big reason it'll be awhile before I retire my G4 PB is that Apple went with the smaller ExpressCard format which is too small to support CompactFlash adaptors. Two of my three digital cameras use CF cards, and I have a CF to PC Card adaptor I leave in the PC Card Slot in the PB (effectively making it a CF slot). It is very convenient when on the road to to only have to take my cameras and PB, no worrying about cables or external adaptors.

If photographers are one of Apple's intended audiences for the MacBook Pro, and since most pro or advanced amateurs will be shooting with digital SLRs (which I believe all use CF), then it was a poor choice on Apple's part to not go with the larger ExpressCard format which would have been capable of supporting (internally) adaptors for any memory card format, including CF.
     
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Dec 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 31, 2006, 07:01 PM
 
[QUOTE=cbrfanatic;3252851]......dang, no compliments on my dock, lol.

Ok, I'll try. How about some screen shots of those applications actually running? I can put all those icons in my dock.
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Circa 1225, from the Old French
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 31, 2006, 07:15 PM
 
Originally Posted by ender View Post
The big reason it'll be awhile before I retire my G4 PB is that Apple went with the smaller ExpressCard format which is too small to support CompactFlash adaptors. Two of my three digital cameras use CF cards, and I have a CF to PC Card adaptor I leave in the PC Card Slot in the PB (effectively making it a CF slot). It is very convenient when on the road to to only have to take my cameras and PB, no worrying about cables or external adaptors.
Is this not acceptable?
Amazon.com: SIIG ExpressCard 11-in-1 Memory Card Reader/Writer ( CE-E01012-S1 ): Electronics
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 31, 2006, 07:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
http://forums.macnn.com/66/ibook-and...t/#post3252114

I've come in for some ridicule on the iBook forum for choosing a Powerbook G4 over a Macbook.
Aside from some very, very specific purposes (none of which I can think of at the moment) it's really tough for me to imagine why someone would want a G4 over a MBP / MB in this day and age. The G4 is obsolete - it was obsolete several years ago. The MBP hangs with and in some cases is faster than the G5 boxes - and it vastly faster than the G4 boxes - in just about any test one can mention, using Intel-compiled software.

Unless one's livelihood depends on G4-only software (that runs poorly on the Intel box) it seems foolish to me to even consider the G4 alternative, unless a huge price discount is offered.

I say this as an ex-PB owner - I owned a 12" PB 1.33 for about a year, and I was always fairly disappointed at its' speed. I have no regrets in buying the 1.83 MBP - it's an entirely new beast, and is vastly faster, even with "just" 1.5GB of RAM and the first-gen 1.83 CPU.

The iMac 2.0 is even faster (with a 7200 RPM 3.5" HDD and a marginally faster CPU).

I'm impressed with the Intel machines. Sorry you had a bad experience, but you're in the tiny minority on this one - and this is a full YEAR after Intel launch, too.
iMac 3.4/i7 (2011) 16GB 1TB HDD/256GB SSD 10.10.4
MBA 1.3/i5 (2013) 4GB 128GB 10.10.3
MB 13/2.4 (2010) 9GB 120GB 10.10.3
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 31, 2006, 07:38 PM
 
And concerning "tuning" a machine to make its' speed the same - c'mon - seriously ... benchmarks don't lie - you can't tune anything to get the kind of performance deltas we all know there are.
iMac 3.4/i7 (2011) 16GB 1TB HDD/256GB SSD 10.10.4
MBA 1.3/i5 (2013) 4GB 128GB 10.10.3
MB 13/2.4 (2010) 9GB 120GB 10.10.3
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Circa 1225, from the Old French
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 31, 2006, 07:49 PM
 
Originally Posted by foo2 View Post
And concerning "tuning" a machine to make its' speed the same - c'mon - seriously ... benchmarks don't lie - you can't tune anything to get the kind of performance deltas we all know there are.
Remove the debug code.


Hah
     
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 31, 2006, 08:20 PM
 
Nope, if you read the description on the very page you provided a link to, you'll notice that it does NOT list CompactFlash as a supported format. CF is wider than Express/34 (about 42mm vs 34mm), so it's a physical impossibility to make a CF-to-Express/34 adaptor that fits entirely within the slot. If Apple had gone with the larger ExpressCard format (50-something?), then you could do it.

I know most consumer cameras use SD or MemoryStick, but most (all?) SLRs use CF.
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 31, 2006, 08:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by Blasphemy View Post
Remove the debug code.


Hah
Not funny.
iMac 3.4/i7 (2011) 16GB 1TB HDD/256GB SSD 10.10.4
MBA 1.3/i5 (2013) 4GB 128GB 10.10.3
MB 13/2.4 (2010) 9GB 120GB 10.10.3
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 31, 2006, 08:48 PM
 
I probably would have gone with the Macbook.

I'm not saying the PowerBook isn't a great laptop, but I would prefer having the newer CPU and the potential for more speed down the road.

That being said, I feel it depends upon what you plan to use the computer for and what applications you use. If you are an email/web/word kind of person, anything will work.
     
Forum Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: London, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 31, 2006, 09:50 PM
 
For £999 you could have got a refurb CD 2.0ghz, 128vram model MacBook Pro from the Apple store.
     
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 1, 2007, 04:53 AM
 
Originally Posted by ender View Post
Nope, if you read the description on the very page you provided a link to, you'll notice that it does NOT list CompactFlash as a supported format. CF is wider than Express/34 (about 42mm vs 34mm), so it's a physical impossibility to make a CF-to-Express/34 adaptor that fits entirely within the slot. If Apple had gone with the larger ExpressCard format (50-something?), then you could do it.

I know most consumer cameras use SD or MemoryStick, but most (all?) SLRs use CF.
Delkin Devices - Products - Expresscard 34

There you go.
     
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 1, 2007, 12:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by cashmonee View Post
Interesting, I guess that would be the next best thing. Better than having a cable and external box. But still not as convenient as having a card that fits ENTIRELY within the slot. Even with a CF card inserted, my current adaptor is fush with the case of my PB. So I can leave the adaptor in the PC card slot all the time and nothing sticks out from the side of my laptop.

Yes, I realize I'm being picky; but knowing me if I left that in my laptop all the time I'd break it off (especially if there was a card inserted and it was sticking out that far) or if I didn't leave it in the laptop I'd forget it or lose it.

But thanks for the link. Like I said, it's better than other options I've seen (but I'll still be hoping Apple finds space in a future laptop for an ExpressCard/54 slot).

PS: Yikes, $60!?! My PC Card adaptor was only $10!
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 1, 2007, 03:09 PM
 
The new Nikon D40 and D80 DSLRs use SD. Connect the cameras to a Mac via USB 2.0 and the need for a card reader disappears.
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 1, 2007, 05:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
The new Nikon D40 and D80 DSLRs use SD. Connect the cameras to a Mac via USB 2.0 and the need for a card reader disappears.
A lot of people don't like doing this - cable wear, camera wear, etc. Also, some people shoot with multiple SD/CF cards, and thus putting them constantly in and out of cameras would be inconvenient.
iMac 3.4/i7 (2011) 16GB 1TB HDD/256GB SSD 10.10.4
MBA 1.3/i5 (2013) 4GB 128GB 10.10.3
MB 13/2.4 (2010) 9GB 120GB 10.10.3
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jun 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 1, 2007, 05:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by cbrfanatic View Post
im waiting for kinks to get ironed out of the pro series before i even think about it.
the rev 2 MBP's are as flawless as any powerbook model, and twice as fast
Hear and download my debut EP 'Ice Pictures' for free here
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 2, 2007, 03:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
The new Nikon D40 and D80 DSLRs use SD. Connect the cameras to a Mac via USB 2.0 and the need for a card reader disappears.
Connecting camera-to-computer is very bad workflow for lots of reasons; historically a good way to lose image data. I too bemoaned the no-CF E-34 slot but the new 40 MB/s Sandisk FW card reader combined with Sandisk Extreme iV cards (mine are 8 GB) absolutely rock and the cable/reader combo is pretty small. My guess is that the reson for E-34 is that Apple may have future E-34 surprises to fitnew Apple products that are smaller than today's MBPs.

Note too that USB 2.0 is actually not a particularly good transfer protocol for multi-GB-sized batches of images.

-Allen Wicks
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: "Working"
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 2, 2007, 03:49 PM
 
Originally Posted by iREZ View Post
g4's will be supported by apple for years to come...look how long they kept the g3's around.
Completely different story though. G3 to G4 was a minor change within the same architecture and nearly everything that ran on one ran on the other. The Intel transition was a huge change, and nothing works on both systems.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 2, 2007, 04:14 PM
 
The G4 Powerbook is a great machine - a year ago it was Apple's flagship laptop - it will continue to be a great machine for years to come. Frankly, it is unlikely that any machine will continue to run the newest apps at full speed much after 3 years old, but for sure your PB will continue to be a servicable machine way longer than that. Don't get too hung up on the differences, there is a huge install base of PPC machines out there that are not going away any time soon.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Los Angeles of the East
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 2, 2007, 04:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by Gossamer View Post
Completely different story though. G3 to G4 was a minor change within the same architecture and nearly everything that ran on one ran on the other. The Intel transition was a huge change, and nothing works on both systems.
you mean like universal apps that work on both intel core duo and power pc processors?
NOW YOU SEE ME! 2.4 MBP and 2.0 MBP (running ubuntu)
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 2, 2007, 05:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by iREZ View Post
you mean like universal apps that work on both intel core duo and power pc processors?
The reason they are "universal" is because someone wrote code (it wasn't automatic, no matter what Apple marketing would like you to believe, for any but the simplest programs) that created those binaries.
iMac 3.4/i7 (2011) 16GB 1TB HDD/256GB SSD 10.10.4
MBA 1.3/i5 (2013) 4GB 128GB 10.10.3
MB 13/2.4 (2010) 9GB 120GB 10.10.3
     
Senior User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Chicago, Earth
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 2, 2007, 05:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by Gossamer View Post
Completely different story though. G3 to G4 was a minor change within the same architecture and nearly everything that ran on one ran on the other. The Intel transition was a huge change, and nothing works on both systems.
You are kidding right?

I went to my C2D from a PB, used the assistant to move everything including applications from the old book to the new one. Everything runs fine. 2/3 of the stuff on my old PowerBook was already a Universal Application.
MBP - 2.33GHz C2D, 3GB RAM, 256MB VRAM, 160GB HD
PB - 1.5GHz G4, 2GB RAM, 128MB VRAM, 80GB HD
PM - Dual 1GHzG4, 1.5GB RAM, NVidia GForce 3, 2x 80 GB HD
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 2, 2007, 07:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by wingdo View Post
You are kidding right?

I went to my C2D from a PB, used the assistant to move everything including applications from the old book to the new one. Everything runs fine. 2/3 of the stuff on my old PowerBook was already a Universal Application.
But the point is...that took tremendous effort. How long will developers continue to do that for PPC binaries coded for obsolete, slow machines that are an ever-diminishing proportion of the Mac user community?
iMac 3.4/i7 (2011) 16GB 1TB HDD/256GB SSD 10.10.4
MBA 1.3/i5 (2013) 4GB 128GB 10.10.3
MB 13/2.4 (2010) 9GB 120GB 10.10.3
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: "Working"
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 2, 2007, 08:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by iREZ View Post
you mean like universal apps that work on both intel core duo and power pc processors?
Originally Posted by wingdo View Post
You are kidding right?

I went to my C2D from a PB, used the assistant to move everything including applications from the old book to the new one. Everything runs fine. 2/3 of the stuff on my old PowerBook was already a Universal Application.
Do you know what a 'Universal' application is? Just like foo2 is saying, it is two complete separate applications written separately, then packaged into one app. It requires two separate programs to be written, adding expensive development time. When someone made a program for a G4, it was pretty much guaranteed to run on a G3 (I realize that some components of iLife '06 and some higher end apps did not though because of altivec utilization), but when someone writes a new program for an intel machine, they have to take the time and completely rewrite it for the PowerPC architecture.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 2, 2007, 09:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
http://forums.macnn.com/66/ibook-and...t/#post3252114

...Given that I won't demand much of the machine beyond e-mail, Internet and perhaps some light photo work...
The uses specified are very well served by a 1.67 GHz G4 PB now and in the future. And unlike the MacBook the PB was built as a pro box:

PB G4 versus MB
Thinner vs. thicker
FW800 v. no FW800
More screen real estate!
More pixels v. less pixels
Backlit keyboard v. no backlit keyboard
Good graphics card v. good on-chip graphics
Express Card Slot v. no Express Card Slot
Visually, the aluminum "pro" model rather than the plastic consumer model

P.S. I own a 1.67 GHz G4 PB as well as a C2D MacBook Pro.

-Allen Wicks
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 2, 2007, 10:16 PM
 
Either machine will serve his needs now and in the future - he's happier with the PB, for many of the reasons SierraDragon mentioned. Horses for courses. I don't think we should loose sleep about this.
     
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: London
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 3, 2007, 12:29 PM
 
Well - nearly a week on and I'm quite happy with the Powerbook. It seems plenty fast enough for me. I definitely value the extra screen space above a slightly snappier machine. I also think the build quality beats the Macbook. The G4 might not be state of the art but it's hardly stone age technology either. There'll be plenty of Mac users working away happily on G4s for a few years yet.
     
Senior User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Chicago, Earth
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 3, 2007, 12:42 PM
 
I've got a PowerBook G4 and a C2D MBP. Except for processor intensive things like playing WoW or running Parallels instead of VPC, I honestly see no real difference in speed between the two. Web pages render about the same, MS Word runs the same .... etc.

Of course I play WoW a lot so I am quite happy with the MBP and my wife loves her "new" PowerBook.
MBP - 2.33GHz C2D, 3GB RAM, 256MB VRAM, 160GB HD
PB - 1.5GHz G4, 2GB RAM, 128MB VRAM, 80GB HD
PM - Dual 1GHzG4, 1.5GB RAM, NVidia GForce 3, 2x 80 GB HD
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:44 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2