[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by hakstooy

Sigh...now I know why Mac users get the rap of being superficial. Change the surface and that's all they see.

Incorrect. IMO, the PowerBooks are the best designed laptops on the planet. They just aren't the fastest. And to me, design is more important than some MHz, even considering the H.264 720p issue. Fortunately, I suspect that the next iteration of the PowerBook may resolve that issue.

As for 1080p H.264, I think that's asking too much at this time.

Glad to know a backlit keyboard is "FAR more relevant to a large segment" of users than faster internals. I guess I live in a fantasy world.

This is a very nice feature IMO, and indeed, more important than some MHz for my usage. I can't tell you how many times I've been using the computer in darkened places and bitching cuz I can't see the keyboard. I'm a touch typist, but I still rely on visual cues from time to time.

And I still find it odd that the vast majority of PC laptops can't include a powered Firewire port. I personally won't buy a laptop without one. I consider powered Firewire a basic feature.

[hakstooy]

OK, bub, lets look at the T43 which I think I've brought up a few times, and you consistently ignore.

As for the features you deign more important than computational performance (makes sense for a computer) it has: gigabit ethernet, 802.11b/g, scrolling trackpad (I've not seen a recent PC notebook that didn't have the ability to do this), and hard drive protection.

That means its missing FW800, BT 2 and a backlit keyboard. As for FW800, its nice, but most people don't use it and there isn't a lot of hardware that does. BT 2 no one has used since there aren't any peripherals yet (T43 does have BT 1.2). Which leaves the backlit keyboard, which does rock and should be implemented on more notebooks, including the 12".

But...if its all about the features, the T43 has quite a few features the PowerBook doesn't have:

Like a fingerprint scanner, 802.11a, a 5-hour batter, and Express Card (which is a sweet lil dandy that allows for things like HD-TV tuners and Intel High Definition Audio...things somewhat important to the media-centric users of PowerBooks, ya think?)

And of course, it has a faster hard drive (7200 rpm), a faster, more efficient processor, faster memory, and a faster graphics card. All while having longer battery life. In a package smaller, thinner and lighter than a 15" PowerBook.

[hakstooy]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

Incorrect. IMO, the PowerBooks are the best designed laptops on the planet. They just aren't the fastest. And to me, design is more important than some MHz, even considering the H.264 720p issue.

No, you misunderstood; that is not my feeling, I am saying that talking to someone like Simon, it becomes clear to me why people get that impression.

As I said before, I was an industrial design major so I am quite preoccupied with design. The current PowerBook is a fantastic design, the design is the primary reason I have purchased 4 in the last year, and I hope they do not radically change it with any impending redesign.

I am just disappointed they are not keeping pace with the market and H.264 really drove this home for me.

And it just boggles me that there are people here who are so oblivious to that fact, and I guess I'm getting wrapped up trying to "enlighten" them. I guess I'd really just like it if people stopped buying the PowerBooks, because as long as they keep selling so well, Apple has no real economic incentive to upgrade them. I hope to lead a glorious boycott that will spur Apple into a spectacular revision!!! Heh.

[Stratus Fear]

Yes, they are both based off the R X800, but the MR X800 is the new version of the 9800, not the X700. That is my point.

The X700 is far more similar to the 9800 than the X800 is. The X800 Mobility is a 12-pipeline chip. If you actually look at the spec and features list between the 9800, the X700 is more an evolution of that past chip. Yes it's made on a .11u process. Yes it has a newer version of power play. Sure, it will have better power consumption, but 20nm is not that large of a process shrink, and since it's probably at a faster clock, under load, I'm sure the chip will still approach similar thermal output and power consumption. The first rev G4, while being mostly an evolution of the old G3 (having a very similar pipeline) still consumed at least as much power as the G3, if not more, even when it was on newer process technology. The whole point of new process technologies and power saving techniques is to attempt to keep power consumption and heat output at similar levels (if not lower, since lower doesn't always happen without a radical redesign), and sometimes that doesn't even happen. While the X700 might be low power enough, I question how it compares to the 9700, and that still hasn't been answered. From what I've seen, the X300 or X600 would be far better for Apple's PowerBook formfactor, and considering Mac OS X's relatively poor OpenGL performance compared to other platforms, would be more ideal than the X700 from a price to performance standpoint. The X600 is also a lot closer relative to the 9700 than the X700, and even though only a four pixel pipeline chip, is still faster than the 9700, and offers the new PowerPlay 5.0 that you like so much. I think we'll see an X600 in the machine before the X700, and it will still offer plenty good performance. The power consumption and heat output ought to be better than the X700's 8 pixel pipeline design as well.

[hakstooy]

Ahh, well now who's doing the qualitative analysis

Fair enough, all good points. I suppose I'm just more optimistic about the X700's consumption than you. Now, I haven't heard that Asus test platform, but it is the same size as a PowerBook, and Apple worked some cooling tricks with the 9700 (it was certainly more quiet than most PC notebooks I heard that had it) so that gives me hope concerning noise.

Of course, if they put a G5 in then who knows what kinds of issues they are gonna have to deal with.

[Stratus Fear]

Ahh, well now who's doing the qualitative analysis

Yeah, but I don't recall you asking me for numbers and then me trying to answer without numbers The context of my statement was important in that, read what I said again

If you find anything comparing the X600 and X700 I'd be interested, I haven't found anything yet; I'm only going off the spec sheets so far.

[hakstooy]

Well, I know this isn't what you're looking for, but still an eye-opening
review nonetheless.

He specifically mentions it as not requiring the huge 10 lb desk ogres the MR 9800 or MR X800 require.

And look at the tests! The thing "trumps" the R 9700 Pro! Thats a better card than what the PowerMacs come with!

Whoa.

[comptr]

Alienware and falcon northwest.

Originally Posted by analogika

I think you are full of ****, hakstooy.

I'm sorry, I had to say it.

Please, show me one laptop - ANY laptop, that incorporates S-ATA, DDR2, and PCIe.

In fact, I'd be interested in seeing any S-ATA 2.5" laptop hard drive AT ALL. If there is one, I've missed the news. Or PCIe desktop card slots available in laptops.

Go on, humor us.

Please.

[Spliff]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

And I still find it odd that the vast majority of PC laptops can't include a powered Firewire port. I personally won't buy a laptop without one. I consider powered Firewire a basic feature.

I've never met a Windows user who gave a crap about Firewire. They're happy with USB 2.0. Sad, but true (at least anecdotally )

[Stratus Fear]

Originally Posted by Spliff

I've never met a Windows user who gave a crap about Firewire. They're happy with USB 2.0. Sad, but true (at least anecdotally )

My PC has firewire. I use it

[itguy05]

Originally Posted by hakstooy

As for the features you deign more important than computational performance (makes sense for a computer) it has: gigabit ethernet, 802.11b/g, scrolling trackpad (I've not seen a recent PC notebook that didn't have the ability to do this), and hard drive protection.

Yes, IBM laptops are the best of the PC bunch. I love the one work gave me except it's HUGE.

BT 2 no one has used since there aren't any peripherals yet (T43 does have BT 1.2).

But in a year or 2 BT2 will be commonplace - the power savings alone will be worth it to mobile phone manufacturers.

Like a fingerprint scanner, 802.11a, a 5-hour batter, and Express Card (which is a sweet lil dandy that allows for things like HD-TV tuners and Intel High Definition Audio...things somewhat important to the media-centric users of PowerBooks, ya think?)

The fingerprint scanner is cool, no doubt.

Correction from:
http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=2285

5 hour battery is an option - standard battery is a quite smaller battery (6 cell standard vs 9 cell option.) Standard battery life should be about the same as the PB's.

You could also argue that FW800 will support HD-TV and HD Audio. I'd never be tied to Intel.

And then the PB has a faster DVD drive (8x).

And of course, it has a faster hard drive (7200 rpm), a faster, more efficient processor, faster memory, and a faster graphics card. All while having longer battery life. In a package smaller, thinner and lighter than a 15" PowerBook.

And funny, it's about the same price as the 15", which for many applications is a much better fit than a 4:3 screen.

For me, I just got the 1.67Ghz 15" Powerbook and it is faster than my IBM A31p P4 2.0Ghz laptop I use from work. And it handles high loads much better than the IBM - probably thanks to OSX. And I know - I'm using my PB this week while the IBM is in for repairs for a loose hinge and cracked plastic.

[SassyPants]

The IBM T43p is ugly tho...even tho it still is my favorite pc laptop

[Scooterboy]

I just did a quick search for Centrino notebooks with PCIe x700 and found this. Hey, I love the design and features of my PowerBook. I'm not so in love with the dated internals, slow bus, and last generation CPU. I mean, for Apple, the G4 is now the educational and budget CPU. The high end consumer and pro desktops are G5. Where is the PowerBook? With the edu and budget CPU. The features help make up some of the slack (and I'm using FW800), but at the end of the day the PowerBook is an iBook with luxury design and features.

Centrino is now on 2nd Generation with PCIe, 533 MHz FSB, HD capability and longer battery life than PowerBook G4. We have the best design, features, and I/O in any laptop. The PowerBook now needs a next generation CPU, logicboard and graphics to put it solidly on a par with Centrino.

By the way, there is one feature I don't ever want to see on a PowerBook: fingerprint scanning. If I get laptop-jacked, I don't want to lose my fingers, too!

[SassyPants]

well, fingerprint scannign isn't even that impressive. you can get usb fingerprint scanners for really really cheap.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

Incorrect. IMO, the PowerBooks are the best designed laptops on the planet. They just aren't the fastest. And to me, design is more important than some MHz, even considering the H.264 720p issue. Fortunately, I suspect that the next iteration of the PowerBook may resolve that issue.

Umm Eug, which issue are you actually talking about? I see that the trailers were encoded at 24fps, so how could the PowerBook possibly play better than 24fps? It was playing back at max quality. Or are you referring to the issues with the 1080 H.264 clips?

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by Simon

Umm Eug, which issue are you actually talking about? I see that the trailers were encoded at 24fps, so how could the PowerBook possibly play better than 24fps? It was playing back at max quality. Or are you referring to the issues with the 1080 H.264 clips?

It seems you are the only person so far to report 24 fps constant with their 1.67 PB. Other people have tried it, and gotten mostly 24 fps, but with drops below that. IOW, a 1.67 PB might be able to do it on a Monday when the moon is full, but not consistently. And that's with 1280x544, not 1280x720.

In truth it's not the end of the world if 720p H.264 playback isn't perfect, but I'd prefer to see a little more performance. In the next PB iteration I want to see at least a 1.8 GHz G4 7448 with 1 MB L2 and 200 MHz bus, but I'd prefer a 1.8 GHz G5 970GX.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

In truth it's not the end of the world if 720p H.264 playback isn't perfect, but I'd prefer to see a little more performance. In the next PB iteration I want to see at least a 1.8 GHz G4 7448 with 1 MB L2 and 200 MHz bus, but I'd prefer a 1.8 GHz G5 970GX.

Well, I guess it's given that the next iteration of the PowerBook will be more powerful and then even those guys with the messed up installs and haxies can get their PowerBooks to play the 24fps. j/k

Apart from that, do you really believe we could see 1.8 GHz G5 970GX by August? I doubt it. Actually, I think it wouldn't be the GX anyway; it's just an Antares with a idle/broken second core, but not really a chip optimized for mobile use like the Centrino. I'd expect Apple/IBM to come up with some G5 variant that is especially optimized for mobile use. OTOH even assuming such a chip would be on some IBM lab table, I can't imagine we'll see it by this summer. They could still go for the 7448 if it isn't just vaporware.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by Simon

Well, I guess it's given that the next iteration of the PowerBook will be more powerful and then even those guys with the messed up installs and haxies can get their PowerBooks to play the 24fps. j/k

Apart from that, do you really believe we could see 1.8 GHz G5 970GX by August? I doubt it. Actually, I think it wouldn't be the GX anyway; it's just an Antares with a idle/broken second core, but not really a chip optimized for mobile use like the Centrino. I'd expect Apple/IBM to come up with some G5 variant that is especially optimized for mobile use. OTOH even assuming such a chip would be on some IBM lab table, I can't imagine we'll see it by this summer. They could still go for the 7448 if it isn't just vaporware.

Not sure if it'd be the GX per se, but something similar at least. And remember, just because a desktop GX might be defective MP, doesn't mean a laptop has to be. August? I dunno. Maybe? As for PPE PowerBooks that some people are predicting, I just don't buy it. Actually, a 970FX-class chip would be fine too.

BTW, the 7448 has already shown up in Apple's tools. Of course, so has the G5 970MP, and that's still vapourware too as it stands today.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

Not sure if it'd be the GX per se, but something similar at least. And remember, just because a desktop GX might be defective MP, doesn't mean a laptop has to be. August? I dunno. Maybe? As for PPE PowerBooks that some people are predicting, I just don't buy it. Actually, a 970FX-class chip would be fine too.

But, at what cost? If it needs to run at 1.4GHz just to get its heat and power specs down to the 1" thickness level, I doubt people will be happier than with some souped up G4+.

Judging by these BareFeats benchmarks, I doubt PB buyers would like to see Apple drop higher clocked 7447s or 7457s for an under-clocked G5.
http://www.barefeats.com/g4up.html

BTW, the 7448 has already shown up in Apple's tools. Of course, so has the G5 970MP, and that's still vapourware too as it stands today.

This is what really worries me. We heard about the FX long before it appeared and we have even heard of Antares already quite some ago. I really am expecting Apple to get Antares into the Power Mac by MWSF at the latest. But, there has been no leak whatsoever about a mobile 970. There are no leaked names, there have been no IBM presentations that refer to it or its development, etc. It's so damn quiet, I'm wondering if they actually really don't even have one. And if they don't... Well, let's not even think about it.

[shatten22]

First things first -

Back fanboys, BACK!

This will all be much easier if you admit the truth... the current powerbook line can't play HD acceptably. I'm running a powerbook 1.5, 1gb RAM, 128mb Vram that I bought this past September that gets anywhere from 12fps-24fps on the Batman Begins 720p Trailer. It also plays the 1080p SLIDESHOW version nicely.

For all of you out there who are crying, "you can't expect a portable to play that stuff," or "your performance is good enough," I say bollocks to you. Senor Jobs was offering us the magic Kool-Aid a year ago, crying out that this was the year of HD. He also said that we were going to be playing with 3ghz+ tower systems by now. That IBM was going to save our a$$e$ in the processor game. They didn't. We haven't moved any farther along performance-wise than the minimal updates we were getting with Motorola. Should we accept that?

NO! Spit out the Apple-branded peyote and get real. My summer of '04 (2004? remember? year of HD?) powerbook does not play 720p HD as smooth as silk. Or like a hot knife through butter. Or like any other non-specific, lame simile. If you HAVE to have one, playing 1080p makes my powerbook as jittery as a crack-whore looking for a fix on Queens Blvd.

I, for one, am not pleased with that. It's a movie trailer! And I'm running a POWERBOOK. The aluminum fleet of Apple computers created for the mobile professional who wants to run cool stuff like MOVIE TRAILERS to show off to his friends and family.

Now I have a PC set-up at home. BACK fanboy, BACK!
It runs an AMD mobile 2400+ overclocked to 2.2ghz. It's a $60 chip. I've got a lousy stick of 512mb RAM in it. It runs 720p better than my powerbook. And by better, I mean steady 24fps.

I love OSX. I like Apple. I hate XP. I dislike Microsoft (love XBOX). But none of that changes the fact that I was playing Doom3 on a single processor a year before you fools (not you) and still am, since most of you guys can't play it now at a decent resolution. The facts are, my powerbook has outdated screen-tech, processor-tech, and ain't the most powerful girl on the block any more.

Apple HAS put us off for a while to focus on the ipod-centric market. It wants that market-share, wouldn't you? Minis, and imac G5's, and ipod dildos. Amazing stuff, really. I'm glad it's here. Apple expects us (the portable users) to stick around, cause we have, but that's no reason we should take it with a smile on our faces.

g

[Simon]

Originally Posted by shatten22

It runs 720p better than my powerbook. And by better, I mean steady 24fps.

My PowerBook runs 720p at steady 24fps too. And I've proven it right here, you haven't btw. So, back fan boy, back.

[shatten22]

Originally Posted by Simon

My PowerBook runs 720p at steady 24fps too. And I've proven it right here, you haven't btw. So, back fan boy, back.

More than happy to be a fan-boy of truth, young apple. By "proven" do you mean ,"i posted a static screenshot that proves absolutely nothing?" I too get 24fps at that timecode, and then it goes to 22, then 12, then back up to 24fps and so on.

Geez. If 170mhz more will let me play 720p perfectly, I GUESS I SHOULD UPGRADE.

Seriously though, the era of portable HD on the mac will not happen until they can get the G5's inside the powerbooks. And that isn't going to happen until they can figure out how not come out with an Alienware-sized laptop. Pretty depressing. It's too bad too, I'd love to switch out my AMD system for a mini so I could run my home theater in style.

g

[Simon]

I posted shots of any timecode I was asked for. It was always 24. You of course may not believe that, but if you're suggesting I'm just plain lying to everybody here, well, whatever. The other readers will see for themselves who they trust, those passing the FUD or those passing the specs.

[shatten22]

Let's say you are telling the truth, and sure, I believe you, you get 24fps per second. Where does that leave the rest of us? That Apple somehow jerry-rigged the latest powerbook to be able to just eke out 720p with an 170mhz difference isn't very impressive. My point is that we are behind the curve. What's yours?

Let me ask, in reference to your sig, how does your 12" do on 720p? I believe that was released during the year of HD too.

[hakstooy]

Simon, you need to wake up to the fact that you are the only person pulling a consisent 24 fps. The reports and the specs suggest you are a freakishly lucky anomaly.

Your repeated argument that the PowerBook handles it just fine apparently only applies in your case, in every other instance I've seen, it doesn't. Some come close, but no cigar, plus you need to remember you're not playing true 720p.

So cop to that already.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by shatten22

Let's say you are telling the truth, and sure, I believe you, you get 24fps per second. Where does that leave the rest of us? That Apple somehow jerry-rigged the latest powerbook to be able to just eke out 720p with an 170mhz difference isn't very impressive. My point is that we are behind the curve. What's yours?

I'm just trying to clean up the FUD left behind by people who don't even own a PowerBook, but decide to diss it just because it fits their narrow minds (no offense pointed your way here). I'm a physicist, I trust my own measurement more than other people's hearsay. When I came here, people were dissing the PowerBook because of two 720p clips. I tested them, noticed they ran 24fps perfectly smooth and gravy. So I came back here and started posting what's FUD and what's measurement. Simple as that. I didn't once say anybody's older PowerBook dropping frames wasn't happening, nevertheless some here saw my screen shots, didn't like that they contradicted their previous Apple bashing and decided to suggest I'm full of ****. Well, I guess most readers will get the message.

In one sentence: The 1.67GHz PowerBook displays the 720p trailers in question at 24fps crisp and clean. Anybody suggesting PowerBooks just can't do it, is spreading FUD.

Let me ask, in reference to your sig, how does your 12" do on 720p? I believe that was released during the year of HD too.

I don't have it here, so I can't test it. Sorry about that. Judging from my gaming experience, its Go5200 with 32MB VRAM sucks major ass. I'd be amazed to see it put out these trailers with anything more than 15fps.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by Simon

But, at what cost? If it needs to run at 1.4GHz just to get its heat and power specs down to the 1" thickness level, I doubt people will be happier than with some souped up G4+.

Judging by these BareFeats benchmarks, I doubt PB buyers would like to see Apple drop higher clocked 7447s or 7457s for an under-clocked G5.
http://www.barefeats.com/g4up.html

I suspect whichever CPU comes, it'd be 1.8 GHz at the top end.

As for raw performance, the G5 keeps up in both integer and Altivec, clock for clock. However, for FP and for bandwidth, the G5 totally destroys the G4. It's a pretty important difference, at least for some power users.

Furthermore, the G5 is 64-bit. While nobody is going to be running more than 4 GB on their PowerBooks, a PowerBook G5 allows for 64-bit app development and testing on the road. The G4 does not.

This is what really worries me. We heard about the FX long before it appeared and we have even heard of Antares already quite some ago. I really am expecting Apple to get Antares into the Power Mac by MWSF at the latest. But, there has been no leak whatsoever about a mobile 970. There are no leaked names, there have been no IBM presentations that refer to it or its development, etc. It's so damn quiet, I'm wondering if they actually really don't even have one. And if they don't... Well, let's not even think about it.

IBM has already said they are working on a laptop G5 with a max power of 30 Watts. They also hinted it may be possible to accomplish this at 1.9 GHz, but like I said, it was only a hint. They have never given this mythical chip a name, but one article on IBM's Linux site said the 970FX was appropriate as a laptop chip. The reference to that was later removed however.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by hakstooy

The reports and the specs suggest you are a freakishly lucky anomaly.

Oh no, you discovered my dirty little secret. I got Steve Jobs' personal development PowerBook with a souped up G4++ and a secret developmental X800 running on a confidential new board. Oooooh. How terrible - I thought nobody would notice. And I photoshopped all my screen shots. And I took out Tiger's debug code - just to deceive you.

Btw, I know who really killed JFK too.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

I suspect whichever CPU comes, it'd be 1.8 GHz at the top end.

After 6+ months of the current PowerBooks
1.67 GHz 7447 -> 1.8 GHz 970fx would be great.
1.67 GHz 7447 -> 1.8 GHz 744x would be terrible.

I hope you're right on the mobile 970.

[Eug Wanker]

The QT player seems to be a little inconsistent, so I'm not terribly surprised at Simon's results.

Sometimes my Macs will play 720p at 12-15 fps smoothly, and sometimes they won't and will drop down to 6 fps. Usually with the former, it's after a fresh reboot or something, but it's not entirely consistent.

Originally Posted by Simon

After 6+ months of the current PowerBooks
1.67 GHz 7447 -> 1.8 GHz 970fx would be great.
1.67 GHz 7447 -> 1.8 GHz 744x would be terrible.

Well, a 1.8 GHz G4 wouldn't be so great for marketing, but from a performance point of view, a 1.8 GHz G4 7448 would actually be quite significant.

The G4 7448 has 1 MB L2, which is twice the L2 cache of the 7447A. It also gets a 20% boost in bus speed, which is nothing to sneeze at.

I wouldn't be surprised if the performance increase ranged from 10% - 30%, depending on the app. This would actually make the G5 a little bit less attractive in some ways in fact. Still, I want a G5, just because.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

Still, I want a G5, just because.

I here ya.

[hakstooy]

Ah, you're a physicist eh? Well so am I (Radiation Effects), and I have a tough time figuring out what kind of physics gives you experience taking screenshots of an information display in Quicktime.

Since you are a scientist, I'll assume you are familiar with a Gaussian distribution. Such distributions apply to any physical product. For example, I primarily deal with solar cells, and while a run from a certain tech may have a range of efficiencies ranging from 25.7% to 31.3%, the manufacturer doesn't claim their tech is 31.3& efficient. They use the heart of the curve, which is significantly less. Well, you're one of the small samples that exist on the way right of the graph, out past the median.

You seem to have gotten a fortunate set of hardware. Be thankful, but stop saying its the norm when the data says it isn't.

[shatten22]

This is just me, an actor with an incomplete college degree, but if you guys are really scientists (by the way I love Bill Nye, say hi for me), wouldn't you both (Simon, hakstooy) agree that we're missing something crucial?

More information. Let's put up a poll and see how many with pbook 1.67's are able to play 720p perfectly. Or maybe there is one already, which there could be, seeing as how I'm too lazy to even look.

g

[f1000]

Here's what I know about the issue so far, so correct me if I'm wrong:

1) PowerBooks could probably play back 1080 HD files without dropping any frames if Apple would add GPU acceleration to the QT MPEG-2 Component. Apple won't even allow third-party developers to have access its graphics APIs.

2) Apple has decided not to add such acceleration to the current line of PowerBooks to force people to adopt H.264 as a standard. Unfortunately, there are few (no?) video cards available that are capable of decoding H.264 in hardware.

3) There is very little image quality difference between the competing HD standards (MPEG-2, WMV-HD, and H.264). The main difference between MPEG-2 and H.264 is that the latter is far more compact and scalable.

4) PCs make better use of their available hardware to play back MPEG-2 and WMV-HD files; hence, they seem faster than Macs. This advantage is less due to raw CPU speed differences and more due to the fact that PCs better exploit the CPU+GPU. I've seen little evidence that PCs can play back H.264 much better than Macs can.

Apple's decision not to improve MPEG-2 decoding performance seems to be an effort to promote H.264 over WMV-HD. By forcing Mac users to adopt H.264, Apple has created a ready market for H.264 video cards and software applications. The downside is that Apple's PowerBooks appear far slower than PC laptops that do incorporate MPEG-2 GPU acceleration.

Apple does not want to see Microsoft's WMV-HD become a standard for HD DVD; if it added GPU acceleration to the MPEG-2 Component, both Mac users and developers might stick with MPEG-2 and reduce the demand for H.264. This in turn would give Microsoft, a company with very deep pockets, a longer timetable in which to convince the video industry to accept WMV-HD as a standard. Apple's ability to influence the market should not be underestimated (USB, iPod, etc.). I believe that Apple's strong support of H.264 is a prelude to an iFlicks service of some sort akin to iTunes.

Anyway, this is my theory as to why Apple's been deliberately crippling its MPEG-2 playback performance. Sure it peeves us PowerBook devotees, but Apple knows its user base well. Few of us are going to jump to a Wintel laptop just to be able to watch HD.

[hakstooy]

Mmm. Politics again. Man I hate politics.

Interesting theory though. I definitely buy the fact that Apple has something going on in regards to a video iTunes equivalent, and pushing H.264 would certainly jibe with that. Perhaps they are willing to make some short term compromises with respect to hardware sales in order to gain a bigger cookie through media distribution. Of course, considering that unless the G5 or 7448 is ready, it isn't really an optimal time for a complete overhaul of their mobile platforms anyway. I would imagine it would be prohibitively expensive to overhaul the entire design, only to have to do it again a short time later when the new chips arrive.

Man, Apple is a-changin'.

[Simon]

Hmm, interesting idea. Let's do a poll. Who here owns a 1.67GHz PowerBook running a clean Tiger install and can't get 24fps in these 720p clips? All the people I've seen here claiming they get <20fps are people with older PowerBooks. Any new ones around that don't deliver? No hearsay, no weird links, just genuine user experience please.

[urrl78]

Let's see. I can't even afford an HD camcorder...The only use for me is to watch HD movies. But as of yet I really don't see that many HD movies out there for my Sony T250 which although only has a 1.2 Ghz Centrino and crappy shared memory, plays 720p like proverbial butter, at least ALL of the trailers I have download, thanks to finding this thread and discovering HD on laptops does exist. So I am in no rush for HD at this time. I suspect for many of you too it's just a NOVELTY item, so why all this fuss??? I'm not crying because my 1.5 Ghz 17" does a mediocre job with 720p. I figure my laptop will be sold in a year or two when the format comes to the local Blockbuster and begins to take over the DVD population there.

I agree Apple has been squeezing every penny out of the Powerbook revisions by miniscule upgrades and I would not be surprised at even another little one this summer or fall. Sorry; it's just business; as long as they have fish to take the bait they will do it. I'm not biting though till I see reliable evidence of playing the 1080p. Hope I am not retired by the time that happens...Look, my Powerbook does an amazing job for what I bought it for; editing DV, DVD entertainment, internet use, etc. so I am hardly going to complain about some format ahead of it's time, at least for ordinary comsumers and wedding video semi pro users like me.

-Oops, my "Dust To Glory" trailer just downloaded for my T250. I'm outta here....

[f1000]

Originally Posted by hakstooy

Mmm. Politics again. Man I hate politics.

Interesting theory though. I definitely buy the fact that Apple has something going on in regards to a video iTunes equivalent, and pushing H.264 would certainly jibe with that. Perhaps they are willing to make some short term compromises with respect to hardware sales in order to gain a bigger cookie through media distribution.

HD DVD won't be widely available for awhile and relatively few people are watching HD via TV. Apple is blowing off the first movers in order to ensure that all manufacturers fall in line behind H.264. Microsoft's big, but it can be beaten just as long as everyone holds the line. The cost to Apple to implement MPEG-2 GPU acceleration is trivial, but it won't do it in order to keep users and manufacturers from breaking ranks.

Now that H.264 seems to be the standard, though, maybe Apple will change its stance.

[itguy05]

Originally Posted by shatten22

F] Senor Jobs was offering us the magic Kool-Aid a year ago, crying out that this was the year of HD.
My summer of '04 (2004? remember? year of HD?) powerbook does not play 720p HD as

Uh, I remember the year of HD quote from the iLife presentation in January of this year. Last year was the year of the laptop, IIRC.

It runs an AMD mobile 2400+ overclocked to 2.2ghz. It's a $60 chip. I've got a lousy stick of 512mb RAM in it. It runs 720p better than my powerbook. And by better, I mean steady 24fps.

Yeah, with WMV-HD, which as many have already stated has much lower CPU requirements than H.264. How big are the files vs the same files encoded with H.264? It's a well known fact that the more advanced the codec the higher the CPU requirements are. I'd bet a G4/800 could play back all hd fine ad uncompressed rates. But the size of those files make it prohibitive.

the fact that I was playing Doom3 on a single processor a year before you fools (not you) and still am, since most of you guys can't play it now at a decent resolution.

Could care less as I don't game.

[Scooterboy]

I have no haxies or whatever installed on my PowerBook. But I did find that my M-Audio Sonica Theater USB card was creating enough drag on the system to cut my frame rates in half. Unplugged, and the Serenity 720p trailer plays decently, between 16 and 24 fps, with the majority of scenes between 20 and 24 fps . I wonder if QuickTime 7 will be improved to lower the bar for at least 720p. If they did, I'd buy QT 7 HD 720p movies instead of DVD's, if such a service existed, and keep them on hard drives instead of crowding my bookshelves. QT Movie Store anyone?

[pearle]

Originally Posted by Simon

Hmm, interesting idea. Let's do a poll. Who here owns a 1.67GHz PowerBook running a clean Tiger install and can't get 24fps in these 720p clips? All the people I've seen here claiming they get <20fps are people with older PowerBooks. Any new ones around that don't deliver? No hearsay, no weird links, just genuine user experience please.

I have a 1.67 17" PB w/ 512 MB ram. When playing the Kingdom of Heaven clip (1280x544) I get anywhere from 13 to 24 fps. It is often below 20fps.

My tiger installation is a clean install.

[Scooterboy]

Now I'm getting 24 fps about half the time, and 20-22 fps much of the time, with a few drops to 12 fps but not many. I deleted everyting from my Startup Items in the Accounts Preference Pane. What a difference! Nearly perfect playback of the Serenity 720p trailer. QT 7 uses between 68 and 80 per cent CPU time running that trailer.

QT 7 on Panther 10.3.9, hardware in sig.

[shatten22]

Originally Posted by itguy05

Uh, I remember the year of HD quote from the iLife presentation in January of this year. Last year was the year of the laptop, IIRC.

Holy microsoft, you're right. Please excuse all complaints leveled at my powerbook g5 1.5ghz not being able to play HD well. It was released late summer '04. It has no business playing HD.
Like you said it was the year of the laptop, and since it is, well, a laptop, I'm satisfied.

[littlegreenspud]

Well playing the trailer on my 1.5 AlBook, 1G RAM, 64Meg video I get 24FPS all the way through except for some of the scene changes that drop it to 17-20 for less than 1 second.

Running 10.3.9 so far...

[hakstooy]

Hmm, it is amazing to me how much better the 15" and 17" with 64 MB VRAM do compared to the 12". The graphics card seems to make a big difference.

[urrl78]

I've noticed too one great way to a speed increase is to back up all your data and do a clean install. Even in Panther it can mean a big difference, especially in booting up. Folks noticing a speed difference in Tiger after installation may be thinking it's all Tiger when it's not neccessarily so. Reinstalling Panther can do it too. Hmmm... maybe I will try it this weekend to see if any improvement on 720P.

[wintermute1]

On such a reinstall, is it sufficient to simply copy the user profile to a backup (firewire) disk and then restore *that" afterwords to the clean install? I did an upgrade install of Tiger to a Rev. A 17 inch powerbook, and am always looking for new ways to make the machine faster. Any guidance on doing this sort of "clean" upgrade would be useful.

D

[ism]

Just for kicks tried on my 12" revB (1 GHz). The most I could get was 6 frames a second (on the NASA shuttle thing). That was with everything else turned off, etc

[urrl78]

Wintermute, I would make sure you have all software installers available on CD, DVD or in your home folder. Once I re-installed OSX and realized something I would have expected on the install disk was not there; might have been iMovie, iDVD or something...but that was years ago. That's all I can think of right now.

[wintermute1]

Thanks for the tip. Assembling those installers will delay my attemting a clean install of Tiger! How much potential benefit can I expect anyway? After all, my system is working now -- more or less without any issues (except for the fact that I would like a newer faster powerbook)?

W