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 > Next PB Processor.....what's the consensus?

Next PB Processor.....what's the consensus? (Page 2)
Thread Tools
SEkker
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: May 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 27, 2005, 07:46 AM
 
Dual core G4, G5, Cell -- so many choices! No wonder Apple is taking its time deciding the future of CPUs for their notebook computers.
     
MORT A POTTY
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Earth
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 28, 2005, 03:51 AM
 
CELL is not suitable without modifications. G5 isn't even close, and dual core G4s are nearly a year away.

it's not Apple taking their time.

and all but the dual core G4 don't make sense at this point.
     
resuna
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 28, 2005, 06:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by MORT A POTTY
the dual-core G4 will be a SUBSTANTIAL redesign of the G4 including many things. most notably are the 667Mhz bus and of course, dual-core.
If Freescale was starting work on that chip right now, I'd say you were right. But they're not.

As for the Cell, the Cell is not a "cool" processor, and it's no faster than any other G5 because there's no software to use any of the SPUs that take up 60% of the die!
レスナ
     
osxisfun
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Internets
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 28, 2005, 06:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by MORT A POTTY
G5 isn't even close.

that we know of. of course they have been working on parallel lines so only steve knows
     
BWhaler
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 28, 2005, 07:02 PM
 
I think people are missing the point with the CPU bump to 2gz or beyond.

The problem with the Apple laptop line is the front side bus. Yes, faster CPU's make things faster, but the FSB is such a bottleneck that the CPU bumps have been mostly cosmetic and for marketing reasons. More memory and better GPU's have been the reasons for most of the speed improvements.

It's not about a G5 or not. It's about a whole new motherboard architecture for the iBooks and PowerBooks. That's the change we really need. A FSB running at 133mb is pathetic, and is the real problem which needs solving. Everything else is marketing.
     
BWhaler
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 28, 2005, 07:06 PM
 
I'd be happy with a dual core. A G5 is a pipe dream for a long time, and honestly, very few people need 64 bits. (I know, I know, there are exceptions, and save us your replies that you 'need' one. There ARE exceptions.)

But a better motherboard design to get over the FSB bottleneck and faster CPU's would be great.

Equally important:

1. Top of the line GPU's are key with at least 128mb memory.
2. Great battery life. We could have a g5 PB right now if you don't mind 30 minutes of battery and a 4" thick laptop. I'd rather have 6 hours of battery life. I mean seriously, how often do you really sit around waiting on your laptop?
     
lilrabbit129
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 28, 2005, 08:01 PM
 
I think prophesizing anything but a G4 in the i/power book is still premature. With the PM's at a virtual stand still on speed increases, I highly doubt they've made any headway in stuff a G5 into a powerbook.

What I really want to see (and I think it's been mentioned on a pervious post) is something along these lines: The ibooks would continue with their current speed up schedule, hopefully getting a 1.5ghz G4 and an updated video card (5200Ulta or so). It'd be nice for apple to provide a decent video solution, but I'm not holding my breath.

The Powerbooks on the other hand would get dual-core 1.67-2Ghz chips. If the powerbook is supposedly a professional class product, then it should be atleast somewhat comparable to the Powermac line. I think dual-core chips would be enough to keep the critics happy until G5s can come though. You never know, dual core G4s could do so well, they might be considered "mobile G5's" . Add to this a nice ATI 9700-9800 class mobile with 128MB of VRAM and the PB's are respectable again =).

But if the G5 PB comes out tomorrow, i'd be more than happy to eat my words.
     
radii_22
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 28, 2005, 08:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by BWhaler
I think people are missing the point with the CPU bump to 2gz or beyond.

The problem with the Apple laptop line is the front side bus. Yes, faster CPU's make things faster, but the FSB is such a bottleneck that the CPU bumps have been mostly cosmetic and for marketing reasons. More memory and better GPU's have been the reasons for most of the speed improvements.

It's not about a G5 or not. It's about a whole new motherboard architecture for the iBooks and PowerBooks. That's the change we really need. A FSB running at 133mb is pathetic, and is the real problem which needs solving. Everything else is marketing.
That's a very good point, I think. Marketing is what Apple does the best, and as S. Jobs said in an interview, they usually got to "buy time", adding cosmetic features to hide the real problems behind.

In other hand, what about a new industrial desing in the PB? It will come with G4's, with the next G5? With the Centrino? I guess that it will be a black carbon fiber PB, with a texture similar to that of the back of Tiger Dashboard Widgets. For the iBook, I hope something white or colored, maybe colored aluminum like the iPod mini, maybe some kind of white iPod, slim design.
--->>> Karate is only for defense
     
holsteinson
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dominican Republic
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 28, 2005, 09:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by Filburt
For PowerBook, a 2 GHz G4 would represent the most significant CPU upgrade in a long time. Not because its clock runs 20% faster (which isn't a big deal), but other benefits this new G4 processor brings (7448): much lower power consumption, larger L2 cache (1 MB), and faster FSB (200 MHz, which still stinks, but better than 167 MHz).

Then again, the next PowerBook may get either dual-core G4 or yet to be announced mobile G5. Who knows.



It is obvious that Apple has reached the limit of itsPowerbook present hardware and they need a complete redesign to accomodate a 1ghz G5. The G4 peaked as 1.42ghz in the desktops and 1.67 in the PB ...

It is amazing our resignation to take any leftovers Apple will release:
200mhz FSB?? the Windows boy are usign already 800mhz ....
2ghz CPU? Toshiba has 3.3ghz P4 M for US$1,500 fully loaded 17" laptop
and we have to pay over 2.5K for our 17" PB... talk about getting your money worth!
Apple please innovate again !!
     
rhythmicmoose
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 28, 2005, 11:07 PM
 
A few things that haven't yet been noted that I think are pertinent:

1. Apple's made comments about the difficulty of making a G5 thermally compatible with the PowerBook. They made nearly identical comments just a few months before releasing the iMac G5.

2. IBM has made more significant progress with a low-power G5 than you've made it sound like. If I recall correctly, the 970FX is the current desktop G5, the 970MP is the dual-core variant, and the 970GX is the low-power version. Also, if I recall correctly, the MP and GX were announced and are being developed on a similar schedule and were supposed to be ready about the same time. I can't imagine that it'll be too much longer for either processor, but if someone has more concrete information please share it.

3. Not CPU related, but still important: ATI announced that their next graphics card would support hardware H.264 decoding. I'm not sure how important this is given that there is still no high-definition media standard and that a new drive probably won't be ready for the PowerBook in time, but the new GPU sounds like something that Apple would jump to incorporate.

4. Regarding the use of higher-resolution displays: Mac OS X's lack of GUI scalability hasn't stopped Apple from releasing a 30" display with over 4 million pixels.

5. Holsteinson: I just looked up that "fully-loaded" Toshiba laptop and found a few things interesting. Looking at the specs I noticed several faults. Firstly, it lacks Bluetooth and gigabit ethernet, and the included hard drive runs at only 4200 rpm (as opposed to the PowerBook's 5400). The base GPU, and this is on their "gamer's laptop" mind you, is a Radeon 9000 (you can upgrade to a 9700, for a price). Even the $999 iBook comes with a newer card. Things didn't get any better when I noticed the picture on top of the page. I realized that this was the same machine that one of my friends owns. The one that he has to keep plugged in because the battery life lasts less than an hour. When I saw it I remember really liking the built-in Harmon Kardon speakers, but not being able to shake the thought that two 17" PowerBooks duct taped together would be easier to carry around. So big whoop. You found a PC that has a higher clock speed and a lower price than the "comparable" Macintosh. Now I challenge you to find one that's built using the same caliber components and engineering.

Why did I just waste so much space on number 5, you ask? Because I think it's important for us to occasionally remind ourselves how good we've got it over here on the light side, shoddy Motorola laptop processors aside.
     
Pao|o
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 28, 2005, 11:38 PM
 
In 2-3 month's time we'll see new Powerbooks. I hope these are low power G5s or at least dual core G4s but it is more likely a speed bump for the 12" to 1.67 and the higher end 15"/17" to 1.8 will happen.

We best keep on an eye on the WWDC for any indications on what will actually come out July/August.
     
osxisfun
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Internets
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 28, 2005, 11:39 PM
 
and a toshiba does not run OSX. period. good points rythmicmoose.
     
sadpandas
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 29, 2005, 04:22 AM
 
i heard it will come with leather interior and power windows as well as gps. holsteinson, i don't really care how what the 'windows boys are using' they are still using windows. you can't polish a turd.
( Last edited by sadpandas; May 29, 2005 at 04:26 AM. Reason: because it's late and i wasn't funny the 1st time around)
*Dual 2.8 quad core Mac Pro, 512 8800 GT, 1tb boot, 500gb audio, 340gb video, 6gb ram
*15"pb*1.67*128vm*100hd*2g ram*
*PMac*Dual 2.0GHz* 4g ram*
*3.0 p4 630* gigabyte848p775* radeon X800 Pro 256* 2g ram*
     
Frans
Forum Regular
Join Date: May 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 29, 2005, 08:18 AM
 
It would be really nice to have a faster PB, however I would prefer a higher screen resolution (1200x800), a lower weight (3 pounds) and a longer battery life, as we see with Sony Vaio, Toshiba Libretto, etc...
After 18 years of MS-DOS and Windows working very happy on Mac, now on a 15" MacBook Pro 2.2 Ghz - 2Gb memory - 200 Gb HD with a 20 and 23" screen. I've been waiting for the iPhone for quite a while, let's role it out in Europe. Just one wish left for now: a light mac (2-3 pounds) with 8 hours of working time. They can do it... :-)
     
kalkalith
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 29, 2005, 08:54 AM
 
Have you read the article posted by The Register claiming –

Expect Apple to ship PowerBook and iBook notebook Macs based on a G5-class PowerPC chip in Q2. So claim sources close to Taiwan's contract manufacturers, DigiTimes reports. Tucked away in a discussion about Apple's manufacturing partners are references to an iBook G5 and a PowerBook G5, which will ship in Q2 2005. They will be built by Asustek and Quanta, respectively.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/01..._powerbook_g5/

------

I know the article is old (Jan 2005), but in any case I pray for a significant revision possibly at MacWorld Sanfransisco on the 6th of June, as I am still working with my trusty titanium powerbook 550MHz of three and a half years.

Would be nice ...
     
holsteinson
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dominican Republic
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 29, 2005, 10:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by rhythmicmoose
A few things that haven't yet been noted that I think are pertinent:

1. Apple's made comments about the difficulty of making a G5 thermally compatible with the PowerBook. They made nearly identical comments just a few months before releasing the iMac G5.

2. IBM has made more significant progress with a low-power G5 than you've made it sound like. If I recall correctly, the 970FX is the current desktop G5, the 970MP is the dual-core variant, and the 970GX is the low-power version. Also, if I recall correctly, the MP and GX were announced and are being developed on a similar schedule and were supposed to be ready about the same time. I can't imagine that it'll be too much longer for either processor, but if someone has more concrete information please share it.

3. Not CPU related, but still important: ATI announced that their next graphics card would support hardware H.264 decoding. I'm not sure how important this is given that there is still no high-definition media standard and that a new drive probably won't be ready for the PowerBook in time, but the new GPU sounds like something that Apple would jump to incorporate.

4. Regarding the use of higher-resolution displays: Mac OS X's lack of GUI scalability hasn't stopped Apple from releasing a 30" display with over 4 million pixels.

5. Holsteinson: I just looked up that "fully-loaded" Toshiba laptop and found a few things interesting. Looking at the specs I noticed several faults. Firstly, it lacks Bluetooth and gigabit ethernet, and the included hard drive runs at only 4200 rpm (as opposed to the PowerBook's 5400). The base GPU, and this is on their "gamer's laptop" mind you, is a Radeon 9000 (you can upgrade to a 9700, for a price). Even the $999 iBook comes with a newer card. Things didn't get any better when I noticed the picture on top of the page. I realized that this was the same machine that one of my friends owns. The one that he has to keep plugged in because the battery life lasts less than an hour. When I saw it I remember really liking the built-in Harmon Kardon speakers, but not being able to shake the thought that two 17" PowerBooks duct taped together would be easier to carry around. So big whoop. You found a PC that has a higher clock speed and a lower price than the "comparable" Macintosh. Now I challenge you to find one that's built using the same caliber components and engineering.

Why did I just waste so much space on number 5, you ask? Because I think it's important for us to occasionally remind ourselves how good we've got it over here on the light side, shoddy Motorola laptop processors aside.

How good we got it ?? 2 years with the same overpriced PB hardware and only 5% market share? if you tell me that the PB increased Apple's presence similar to what the iPod has gained I would agree but obviously this is not the case! Apple needs to innovate asap and give us a NEW PB optimized for Tiger, with a 800mhz FSB, 1MB L2, 256MB VRAM (for 17"), better LCD, 16x Superdrive, real 3 hours battery, 1.6ghz G5, 7200RPM 16mb SATA HD, Pre 802.11N airport card with more range/speed, etc. a then I would pay happy my US$3K for one
     
newsushi
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 29, 2005, 11:41 AM
 
Well, I demand a Dual core 3Ghz G5 with a 1Ghz FSB, 1000x Superdrive, and all sorts of other stuff.

Actually, I don't really sit around and wait on my PB to process much...and when I do, well, I suppose you could say that "I asked for it". That said, 16-bit and 32-bit graphics processing in coming soon, and my PB can't handle that...not unless I'm willing to watch the entire Star Wars saga while waiting for PS to render the images. Until then, I'd be happy with a cosmetic processor bump (1.8 - 2.0 Ghz available for 12, 15, and 17), a video card capable of powering the 30" Cinema Display in the 12", and a MAJOR FSB bump (oh, let's say 800 MHZ).

If Apple can't bring Powerbooks somewhat more in line with the PowerMac series (oh, come on, a new iMac blows my PB away...) in the next couple of years, I may have to buy an actual desktop to do the heavy lifting, and use PBs for travel...oh the horror.

-NewSushi
     
FNA
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: May 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 29, 2005, 12:09 PM
 
I have a powerbook 15" 1.67 GHz that I upgraded when I ordered it from apple. It has 128MB VRAM and the 100 GB 5400 disk and one, 1 GB stick of RAM. I supplied the other 1 GB stick.

Now I would be classified as a business user. When I work on it, microsoft office stuff, lotus notes and thunderbird e-mail, itunes. For 99% of what I do, I honestly cannot complain about the speed. Especially when an app has been loaded in memory, it flies. I intentionally loaded up the RAM because when I work, I have a lot of stuff open, and I thought that would help the machine run smoother.

Anything photoshop or video, that would require some patience.

So I guess what I am saying is, processor wise, I am not sure we are hurting here. I totally agree on the faster FSB and more L2 cache. I would like to see 7200 SATA disk and more screen resolution on the powerbook line. I would think at least 1600 x 1200 on the PB 15".
     
Commodus
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 29, 2005, 12:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by kalkalith
Have you read the article posted by The Register claiming –

Expect Apple to ship PowerBook and iBook notebook Macs based on a G5-class PowerPC chip in Q2. So claim sources close to Taiwan's contract manufacturers, DigiTimes reports. Tucked away in a discussion about Apple's manufacturing partners are references to an iBook G5 and a PowerBook G5, which will ship in Q2 2005. They will be built by Asustek and Quanta, respectively.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/01..._powerbook_g5/
Stop right there. It's Digitimes, so this virtually guarantees that the story is false. They're also claiming that there will be 2 and 4 GB iPod shuffles in the summer. I doubt Apple's going to have four times the capacity on the shuffle in 2005 while still keeping the price down to $150; likewise, I doubt that Apple will have such good fortune that their entire laptop line will move to G5s in one fell swoop.

Realistically, Apple will use the MPC 7448; it would still be a pretty significant update even if it topped out at 1.8 GHz, since the extra L2 and faster bus speed could have a huge impact.

Optimistically, there's the possibility that there's a low-power G5 that is or will be available soon (within the next 3 months or so).
24-inch iMac Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz
     
sodamnregistered2
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Atlanta
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 29, 2005, 01:54 PM
 
Would anyone else buy a dual 1.25GHz G4 Powerbook with 7200rpm drives?

It could be 1.5" thick, the battery could last one hour, it could weigh 8 pounds, who cares. I would just love to have something that I could pick-up and move to another location, and be able to edit, render and compress. I rarely use batteries anyhow. If you cared about battery life, maybe they could throw a mode in there that turns a CPU off when on battery power.

OS X handles dual CPUs so well it's a shame to not find more creative ways to use "obsolete" chips in exciting new ways.

If you've ever had to lug a G5 AND a screen into a hotel or conference center, you'd know where I was coming from. Apple needs to rethink their Pro position. They have some banging software (FCP, Motion, DVDSP) but you are tethered to a G5 to use that stuff.

Even some sort of LISA looking thing. A lunchbox with a handle, I don't care, just get me some portable power. Wow, a quad 1.25 in a lunch box. Ai'ght!

Sometimes Apple is too stuck on style for their own good. I have a Dell 5150 Laptop. It's got a 1600x1200 screen, a 3GHz PIV, it's big, it's ugly, it's hot, the fans blow all the time, the battery life is teh suck, but I love that thing. It's fast and I can get on an airplane with it and go somewhere with it.

I'm just trying to think different, that's all.
MacBook Pro C2D 2.16GHz 2GB 120GB OSX 10.4.9, Boot Camp 1.2, Vista Home Premium
mac mini 1.42, 60GB 7200rpm, 1GB (sold), dual 2GHz/G5 (sold), Powerbook 15" 1GHz (sold)
dual G4 800MHz (sold), dual G4 450MHz (sold), G4 450MHz (sold), Powerbook Pismo G3 500MHz (sold)
PowerMac 9500 132MHz 601, dual 180MHz 604e, Newer G3 400MHz (in closet)
Powermac 7100 80MHz (sold), Powermac 7100 66MHz (sold)
     
demosuzki
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: May 2005
Location: dublin, ireland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 29, 2005, 03:55 PM
 
beside a bump to duel core or G5

what about other goodies for the next revision ?

= some kind of DVD or CD boot to straight media player for DVDs etc. like some of the new toshbia portables ?

= lightscribe dvd\cd burning ?

= tablet ?

= gps ?

= new design ?

what else do do we expect or want ?

/ds
     
SierraDragon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 29, 2005, 04:54 PM
 
We buy new PBs for the _future_. Today, right now, PBs are behind the RAM curve. Apps like Photoshop prefer 4-6 GB of RAM and a second fast physical hard drive. And when the OS is full 64 bit (which will occur during the life of any new PB) apps will be designed to _really_ gobble RAM. We need architectural improvements like a second hard drive and real RAM access (2 GB is totally lame) far more than we need cpu speed improvements!
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 29, 2005, 05:23 PM
 
where the hell would you like to stick that second hard drive?
     
radii_22
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 29, 2005, 05:34 PM
 
Originally Posted by sodamnregistered2

Even some sort of LISA looking thing. A lunchbox with a handle, I don't care, just get me some portable power. Wow, a quad 1.25 in a lunch box. Ai'ght!.
Get a bag and carry a 17 imac g5... without the base, it's like a portable, isn't it? You can have VESA arms in your office and home... it could be a good idea. Seriously, I consider that the problem is that every computer in these days, PC or Mac, can't afford to be as fast as the desktop computers... People like Powerbooks not only for power, but for stability, the OS, Unix, lightness, etc.
--->>> Karate is only for defense
     
sodamnregistered2
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Atlanta
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 29, 2005, 06:06 PM
 
Originally Posted by analogika
where the hell would you like to stick that second hard drive?
There are PC laptops with RAID nowadays. Apple is so hung up on sleek style that they are stagnating in the portable market.

Kill the iBook, it's not that much crappier than the 12" PB.

Kill the 17" it's too big and offers no serious advantage.

====

Keep the 12" PB

Keep the 15" PB

Build some sort of battery killing 9 pound dual CPU thing that someone could actually use to render, edit and compress with. Right now, I'd be afraid to be trapped in a jobsite or client location with a job to do armed soley with a Powerbook.

2 sleek laptops with decent baatery life (12" and 15") and one dual CPU brick that could handle some larger tasks while being decently mobile.

A lot of editor/animators would give up battery life for some power. I have had 3 powerbooks and just never really ever used the batteries, I just plugged it in. OS X rocks so hard with dual CPUs it's a shame to not try to do something cool with some of these "obsolete" chips.
MacBook Pro C2D 2.16GHz 2GB 120GB OSX 10.4.9, Boot Camp 1.2, Vista Home Premium
mac mini 1.42, 60GB 7200rpm, 1GB (sold), dual 2GHz/G5 (sold), Powerbook 15" 1GHz (sold)
dual G4 800MHz (sold), dual G4 450MHz (sold), G4 450MHz (sold), Powerbook Pismo G3 500MHz (sold)
PowerMac 9500 132MHz 601, dual 180MHz 604e, Newer G3 400MHz (in closet)
Powermac 7100 80MHz (sold), Powermac 7100 66MHz (sold)
     
OfficerDigby
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: May 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 29, 2005, 07:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by sodamnregistered2
Would anyone else buy a dual 1.25GHz G4 Powerbook with 7200rpm drives?

It could be 1.5" thick, the battery could last one hour, it could weigh 8 pounds, who cares. I would just love to have something that I could pick-up and move to another location, and be able to edit, render and compress. I rarely use batteries anyhow. If you cared about battery life, maybe they could throw a mode in there that turns a CPU off when on battery power.

OS X handles dual CPUs so well it's a shame to not find more creative ways to use "obsolete" chips in exciting new ways.

If you've ever had to lug a G5 AND a screen into a hotel or conference center, you'd know where I was coming from. Apple needs to rethink their Pro position. They have some banging software (FCP, Motion, DVDSP) but you are tethered to a G5 to use that stuff.

Even some sort of LISA looking thing. A lunchbox with a handle, I don't care, just get me some portable power. Wow, a quad 1.25 in a lunch box. Ai'ght!

Sometimes Apple is too stuck on style for their own good. I have a Dell 5150 Laptop. It's got a 1600x1200 screen, a 3GHz PIV, it's big, it's ugly, it's hot, the fans blow all the time, the battery life is teh suck, but I love that thing. It's fast and I can get on an airplane with it and go somewhere with it.

I'm just trying to think different, that's all.
OK lets think different for a bit. I think you need a iPRO mini box (iMini with Nasty specs!) and, maybe (not sure) a connectable screen/keyboard which folds up like like an empty 17/19" PB...
And unfolds at the back of screen for a stand ..?

OK I'll talk to Steve at work tomorrow and get that English designer on it to make it look nice.
     
sodamnregistered2
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Atlanta
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 29, 2005, 08:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by OfficerDigby
OK I'll talk to Steve at work tomorrow and get that English designer on it to make it look nice.
Anything you could do would be much appreciated.

Just a dual 1.25 G4 in a 15" or 17" Powerbook frame with an expanded 2" thick base to deal with the heat from 2 CPUs and 2 hard drives. The battery can last anywhere between 30 minutes and 1 hour. I plan to mostly have it plugged in.

I'll pay-pal you $1 if you can make this happen.
MacBook Pro C2D 2.16GHz 2GB 120GB OSX 10.4.9, Boot Camp 1.2, Vista Home Premium
mac mini 1.42, 60GB 7200rpm, 1GB (sold), dual 2GHz/G5 (sold), Powerbook 15" 1GHz (sold)
dual G4 800MHz (sold), dual G4 450MHz (sold), G4 450MHz (sold), Powerbook Pismo G3 500MHz (sold)
PowerMac 9500 132MHz 601, dual 180MHz 604e, Newer G3 400MHz (in closet)
Powermac 7100 80MHz (sold), Powermac 7100 66MHz (sold)
     
zzarg
Forum Regular
Join Date: Sep 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 29, 2005, 10:26 PM
 
now that the whole "where is the G5" sulking is out of the way.... Dual-G4 would be great. Or a Processor and FSB speed-hump. As long as the upgrade gives us at least a 20% hitch over current levels it'll be worth it. And the architecture is kinda irrelevant as long as it (a) works and (b) has a 24 month lifespan (at least)
Default to 2GB of RAM with options for (say) 8GB without having to throw away the default (I hate being left with redundant sticks no-one wants)
At least a 100GB 7200RPM drive, although the idea of two so you can seperate OS and Virtual RAM from applications (and make the applications drive easily swappable so when you upgrade or need to use a different machine you can take it with you !) would be cool
Improve the graphics - Screen res, GPU and VRAM. The PB at the moment is probably the worst performing in it's class (compared to some of the same priced PCs) and even Dashboard looks pretty shabby on some of the lower capability machines. While I actually like the clarify of the 12" and 15" screens sometimes you need a bit more real-estate and the current PPI limits are just too 2003.
Battery life on my PowerBook isn't bad. But doubling it wouldn't hurt either. I get 2-3 hours from my PB and 7-8 from my Vaio... doing the same sort of stuff. Guess which I take on the road and which ends up tethered at home.
Keep the awesome WiFi and Bluetooth capabilities. So much better than in PC land ! And the great feel of the keyboard. And back lighting. It might not be useful but it's way cool !

I want to be able to run iTunes, Office, VirtualPC (hey, some of us still need the odd Windoze app), Safari, QuickSilver (and some other handy utilities) and PhotoShop and now care how many windows I've got open, or wait for the beachball to stop spinning every time I try and open a document.
     
SEkker
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: May 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 29, 2005, 11:13 PM
 
The last time Apple took this long to make a real update to a product line, they were developing the G5.

The reality is that the current CPUs still cover MOST (not all, but >90% or more) of conventional notebook uses AND users. I hear all these requests for machines to edit video, etc; they all are not really practical, who would want to edit video on a machine with a 5400 rpm 100 GB HD? If I had a choice, I'd lug that G5 and a monitor around. If I'm doing THAT kind of heavy lifting, the cost of the G5 (in time of inconvenience) is tiny.

The real question: what does Apple have up its sleeve in terms of notebook capabilities that would actually NEED a dual-core G4 or G5? A tablet model with real-time handwriting recognition? At this point, I think I'd be disappointed if all we saw was a 2GHz G4, or an underclocked 1.67 GHz G5 PB, etc. Apple has pretty much made THE notebook standard with this now over two-year old AlPB, which was really just a polished form of the TiPB. Apple innovates in 4-5 year cycles; we're looking at something really new, and I don't think it's the processor that's the real story. [No inside information here -- just a long-time Apple observer.] Apple's A-team whipped out the PB17 as a special project while they designed the G5 desktop, then went to the G5 iMac. The iBook team made the PB12, and it took forever for the PB15Al to come to market (and it still came too soon, see the white spot locked thread) because the A team was busy. The next gen iPod is clearly a video player; the A team is free to create, and the model in line is the powerbook.

Should be fun to see what Ives has in mind -- I certainly have enjoyed my time with his 'side project', this revA PB17!
     
Eug Wanker
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dangling something in the water… of the Arabian Sea
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2005, 12:15 AM
 
Originally Posted by Eug Wanker
In some tests it'd actually be faster than a similarly clocked G5. OTOH, in certain tests, a G5 would be much faster.
Check out the Cinebench thread.

G5 2.0 CPU score: 275
G4 2.0 CPU score: 170

In other words, at this benchmark (which represents a real app, unlike Xbench), the G5 is 62% faster than the G4, clock-for-clock.
     
sodamnregistered2
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Atlanta
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2005, 02:24 AM
 
Originally Posted by SEkker
The reality is that the current CPUs still cover MOST (not all, but >90% or more) of conventional notebook uses AND users. I hear all these requests for machines to edit video, etc; they all are not really practical, who would want to edit video on a machine with a 5400 rpm 100 GB HD? If I had a choice, I'd lug that G5 and a monitor around. If I'm doing THAT kind of heavy lifting, the cost of the G5 (in time of inconvenience) is tiny.
I'm in the minority, I admit this. I'm a pro user. That's the user group that Apple oddly enough courts and shits on at the same time.

I live in Atlanta. Say I have to go work in Orlando or Las Vegas. I have to ship a G5 and a monitor? Or rent a monitor locally?

Yes, the current lineup and processors are good enough for most people. No doubt we are at a point where even the bottom of Apple's or Dell's lineup is good enough for most people.

Go to the Sager website. They have laptops with 7200rpm internal RAID set-ups. They have laptops with 1920 x whatever resolution screens. So, is Apple going to be a lightweight consumer companty, or are they gonna step-up and gives the pros something to chew on?

A couple of years ago, the Powerbook was boss. The G4 desktops grew stagnant. Now the G5 is boss and the Powerbook is stagnant. As long as Apple is captive to either Motorola or IBM they will NEVER fix this problem.

In the PC world they have options. Pentium M, Pentium D, Pentium 4, Athlon64, Opteron Dual Core, etc. Apple has G3, G4 and G5. Each with severe limitations. I feel for Apple, always have. Right now, they have the best OS out there and some super software in FCP/Motion/DVDSP etc, but, they can't get their hardware act together to go with it, and frankly, it's Apple's fault.

My money is where my mouth is. I have a Mac mini so I can continue to usethe wonderful OS X, but my work is now done on PC. I did not even get into the G5 video cards and crappy openGL issues for 3d gfx. Not one single workstation level card for Mac.

Dell Precision M70 laptop has a 256MB Quadro 1400. Not even the G5 desktops can touch that.
MacBook Pro C2D 2.16GHz 2GB 120GB OSX 10.4.9, Boot Camp 1.2, Vista Home Premium
mac mini 1.42, 60GB 7200rpm, 1GB (sold), dual 2GHz/G5 (sold), Powerbook 15" 1GHz (sold)
dual G4 800MHz (sold), dual G4 450MHz (sold), G4 450MHz (sold), Powerbook Pismo G3 500MHz (sold)
PowerMac 9500 132MHz 601, dual 180MHz 604e, Newer G3 400MHz (in closet)
Powermac 7100 80MHz (sold), Powermac 7100 66MHz (sold)
     
bobolicious
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Aug 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2005, 07:22 AM
 
I'm hoping the PB HD issue might be solved with a dual option, allowing 200gb+ in an array and helping both speed & capacity limitations... As far as a G5 I was told 'wait until summer 2005', although to be honest if the fan is going to run as often as my PC's I might be inclined to pick up a G4 cast off...

Either way Apple needs to do something about the widening gap in performance between desktops & powerbooks...
     
radii_22
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2005, 08:44 AM
 
Originally Posted by sodamnregistered2
In the PC world they have options. Pentium M, Pentium D, Pentium 4, Athlon64, Opteron Dual Core, etc. Apple has G3, G4 and G5. Each with severe limitations. I feel for Apple, always have. Right now, they have the best OS out there and some super software in FCP/Motion/DVDSP etc, but, they can't get their hardware act together to go with it, and frankly, it's Apple's fault.

My money is where my mouth is. I have a Mac mini so I can continue to usethe wonderful OS X, but my work is now done on PC. I did not even get into the G5 video cards and crappy openGL issues for 3d gfx. Not one single workstation level card for Mac.

Dell Precision M70 laptop has a 256MB Quadro 1400. Not even the G5 desktops can touch that.
I think you have a point, but I don't know how Apple will do to change the paradigm of ultra slim and beautiful notebooks to a little bit more "bulky" but powerful... I agree that Apple hardware is just under the bar, if they want to profit the momentum of the "halo effect" they should invest a lot more in the power of their hardware. It's a little bit paradoxical that being brother of Pixar animation, Apple work stations are lame in 3D graphics...
--->>> Karate is only for defense
     
Dave Hagan
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2005, 11:06 AM
 
For starters Apple could give us brighter, higher resolution displays.
Dave Hagan | Apple Certified Technical Coordinator | iMac G5 1.9GHz | PowerBook G4 1.5GHz | Power Mac G4 933 MHz
     
Eug Wanker
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dangling something in the water… of the Arabian Sea
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2005, 11:27 AM
 
1) It would be a complete waste of time for Apple to spec dual hard drives in a PowerBook.

2) A dual 1.25 GHz 7448 could be doable, but I don't see the point quite honestly. If they went with the G4, I'd expect a single 1.8 GHz 7448.

3) I'm still of the mind that the next iteration of the PowerBook is likely the G5, at 1.6-1.8 GHz.

4) Higher pixel density displays do not work well with current OSes, since these OSes are not resolution independent. Furthermore the Taiwanese LCD makers have done a study that has shown that the vast majority of their customers are happy with screens under 110 ppi. In fact, most people who buy high pixel density laptops run them at a non-native resolution, which means they look much worse than they should. Indeed, the group of users who buys high pixel density screens and run them at native resolution is very small. Thus, it doesn't make a lot of sense for Apple to spec these. They could be added as an option, but it seems that Apple thinks it's just not worth the hassle. That's a bitch for the few who actually really care, but from a business point of view, it does make some sense. I could see a 17" with 1920x1200 (ie. HD) option though, for lots of extra cash.
     
Dave Hagan
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2005, 11:50 AM
 
Originally Posted by Eug Wanker
4) Higher pixel density displays do not work well with current OSes, since these OSes are not resolution independent. Furthermore the Taiwanese LCD makers have done a study that has shown that the vast majority of their customers are happy with screens under 110 ppi. In fact, most people who buy high pixel density laptops run them at a non-native resolution, which means they look much worse than they should. Indeed, the group of users who buys high pixel density screens and run them at native resolution is very small. Thus, it doesn't make a lot of sense for Apple to spec these. They could be added as an option, but it seems that Apple thinks it's just not worth the hassle. That's a bitch for the few who actually really care, but from a business point of view, it does make some sense. I could see a 17" with 1920x1200 (ie. HD) option though, for lots of extra cash.
OK, Eug, I would just like a brighter, more color accurate display from Apple...not necessarily the resolution...just the brightness and color...thanks

Edit: Oh and improved viewing angle too.
Dave Hagan | Apple Certified Technical Coordinator | iMac G5 1.9GHz | PowerBook G4 1.5GHz | Power Mac G4 933 MHz
     
Eug Wanker
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dangling something in the water… of the Arabian Sea
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2005, 12:10 PM
 
I haven't found screen brightness an issue, and viewing angle seems OK too. At least for the 15" and 17" that is. I can't say the same for the 12" though.

As for colour, some people swear by Supercal for calibrating the colour. I haven't used it though, since bang on colour accuracy isn't critical for my stuff.
     
Dave Hagan
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2005, 12:32 PM
 
There are some aspects to this that are purely subjective. SuperCal is good, however, if the color of the backlight behind the display is already biased, SuperCal can only be effective to a point. Apple is using a horrible backlight (relatively speaking) in its PowerBook and iBook displays. The only exception might be the 17-inch, but that display could be brighter. However, the brightness on all Apple's portables should be on par with the Super/Xbrite displays. There is no comparison.
Dave Hagan | Apple Certified Technical Coordinator | iMac G5 1.9GHz | PowerBook G4 1.5GHz | Power Mac G4 933 MHz
     
Eug Wanker
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dangling something in the water… of the Arabian Sea
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2005, 12:37 PM
 
Xbrite displays suck IMO. Very hard to work with for more than 15 minutes.

If Apple switched to those completely, I'd stop buying PowerBooks.

But that's just me.
     
Dave Hagan
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2005, 12:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eug Wanker
Xbrite displays suck IMO. Very hard to work with for more than 15 minutes.
How do they suck?
Dave Hagan | Apple Certified Technical Coordinator | iMac G5 1.9GHz | PowerBook G4 1.5GHz | Power Mac G4 933 MHz
     
osxisfun
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Internets
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2005, 12:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by Dave Hagan
How do they suck?

I know for a lot of people this will come down to a personal opinion but my friend just bought a new latop with xbrite.


OUUUUUCHHHHHHHHHHHH.. my eyes. oh the freaking glare. we were in a room with not a lot of light "reflections" or glare. and this thing was hardly viewable. it sucked donkey. glare glare glare.


Its' been argued in another thread before but ANYONE thinking of buying a pc laptop with xbrite should take the time to look at one in person.
     
Dave Hagan
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2005, 01:06 PM
 
I would like the xbrite minus the glare. I think that this is possible. My understanding is that xbrite has two backlights as opposed to the traditional one lamp used. The glossy screen is just marketing.
Dave Hagan | Apple Certified Technical Coordinator | iMac G5 1.9GHz | PowerBook G4 1.5GHz | Power Mac G4 933 MHz
     
Eug Wanker
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dangling something in the water… of the Arabian Sea
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2005, 01:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by Dave Hagan
I would like the xbrite minus the glare. I think that this is possible. My understanding is that xbrite has two backlights as opposed to the traditional one lamp used. The glossy screen is just marketing.
If it were possible right now, we'd have it already, but we don't.
     
holsteinson
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dominican Republic
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2005, 08:12 PM
 
thanks for also stating so clearly our new and improved hardware need for our next PB release

as you can see in the PB feature poll in the PB forum the FSB 800mhz is the most wanted feature voted
     
scairns
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Victoria, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2005, 12:43 AM
 
Is it just me, or have there been a rush of iBook and PowerBook specials in recent weeks/months?
Is this Apple's way of depleting stock-on-hand to make way for the "new-and-improved" versions?

I've been holding off on purchasing a replacement PB, as I'm hoping for some sort of update to the line-up, along the lines of improved FSB and video capability, especially with the way OS X is now handling its video processing. We'll see what happens after the WWDC.

Also, someone queried where a 2nd HDD could be placed in a PB.
Looking at the interior space difference between a 12" PB and a 17" PB, vs. the actual spec differences, I can quite readily see that there is room to fit it into a 17" PB, and possibly into a 15" PB . . . with a little re-organizing.
( Last edited by scairns; May 31, 2005 at 07:04 PM. Reason: Sp mistakes)
     
krove
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2005, 02:51 PM
 
I'm holding my breath for a WWDC announcement. I'm planning on buying a new PowerBook around August, and I'd love for it to have a faster front-side bus. That, IMO, is the single greatest detriment on performance.

Of course, to get a faster front-side bus, Apple needs to develop a mobile chip-set (aka the "bridge") that is compatible with either the PPC 7448 or G5 (depending on what they have available and fits the thermal constraints). Hopefully they have made a choice between the above processors, have been working on said chip set, and haven't been sitting on their laurels (very much doubt this).

Naturally, in developing said chip set, we will get new features to take advantage of the faster bus: SATA, faster RAM, faster graphics interface (AGP or PCIe?), integrated H.264 decoding, etc. The development of such a chip set presents an enormous investment for Apple because the PowerBook line (and maybe iBook, eventually) will be using this chip set for years to come. As such, the choices Apple makes with respect to this new chip set must be the right choices from the get go.

Please let this all fall into place this summer rather than later!
( Last edited by krove; May 31, 2005 at 04:51 PM. Reason: sp mistake)

How did it come to this? Goodbye PowerPC. | sensory output
     
wtmcgee
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Atlanta, GA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 2, 2005, 03:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by krove
I'm holding my breath for a WWDC announcement. I'm planning on buying a new PowerBook around August, and I'd love for it to have a faster front-side bus. That, IMO, is the single greatest detriment on performance.

Of course, to get a faster front-side bus, Apple needs to develop a mobile chip-set (aka the "bridge") that is compatible with either the PPC 7448 or G5 (depending on what they have available and fits the thermal constraints). Hopefully they have made a choice between the above processors, have been working on said chip set, and haven't been sitting on their laurels (very much doubt this).

Naturally, in developing said chip set, we will get new features to take advantage of the faster bus: SATA, faster RAM, faster graphics interface (AGP or PCIe?), integrated H.264 decoding, etc. The development of such a chip set presents an enormous investment for Apple because the PowerBook line (and maybe iBook, eventually) will be using this chip set for years to come. As such, the choices Apple makes with respect to this new chip set must be the right choices from the get go.

Please let this all fall into place this summer rather than later!
Ditto. I'll be buying a new 12" laptop in July regardless, but I'd love to see it have a bit more power than the current model.
     
lilrabbit129
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 2, 2005, 03:42 PM
 
Agreed.

Some sort of H.264 decoding hardware is needed on the powerbooks. Since right now, the minimum to play H.264 HD content is a dual G5, some decoding hardware will be needed for the powerbooks to really be called "power".
     
Eug Wanker
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dangling something in the water… of the Arabian Sea
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 2, 2005, 03:49 PM
 
Some sort of H.264 decoding hardware is needed on the powerbooks. Since right now, the minimum to play H.264 HD content is a dual G5, some decoding hardware will be needed for the powerbooks to really be called "power".
1) A 1.8 GHz G4 7448 would play 720p H.264 movie trailers (1280x544) just fine.
2) A single G5 plays 720p H.264 material fine.
3) No PowerBook has enough pixels to display full rez 1080p.

ie. Dream on.
     
lilrabbit129
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 2, 2005, 04:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eug Wanker
1) A 1.8 GHz G4 7448 would play 720p H.264 movie trailers (1280x544) just fine.
2) A single G5 plays 720p H.264 material fine.
3) No PowerBook has enough pixels to display full rez 1080p.

ie. Dream on.
That's good to know about the 1.8 G4 and the single G5. But all powerbooks are capable of driving an external display at much higher resolutions than the internal display. It might not be reasonable to include the extra hardware in the 12" or even the 15", but the 17" could be a good candidate.

Plus this type of thing could be a good stop-gap until a major revision. The performance of a system is based on many factors, only one of which is the processor speed. Something like this, at least in my mind, could really help with the "stagnating"(in some peoples eyes) image of the powerbook.

We can all dream =).
     
 
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
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:13 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,