[Randman]

Sorry, but gotta rant on this one.
I am truly tired of hearing people ask about G5 PowerBooks as if they'll be some Holy Grail and completely revolutionize computing.
I own a PB17, rev c, and I've worked on G5 PowerMacs and G5 iMacs. And while the desktops are more powerful, in the long run, the increase in power won't be life-altering.
If more people just got a little more ram, performances would increase as much if not more than going to a 1.8 G5.

The PB line will go to G5 at some time, but the PM and iMacs line looks as if it'll be ahead of the curve then. Plus, you have rev a, which I've always been a little leery of.

If you have an older system, get an iMac or PM if you truly crave a G5. If you have a rev b or rev c PB, be happy with it until it's time to upgrade.
But jeez, having people create posts every other day asking if PowerBook G5s are coming around the corner is laughable at this point.

Am I alone in this thinking, or is it that I'm just immune to the Reality Distortion Field on this one?

[Lancer409]

agreed. it'll get here when it gets here.

i mean, we had the powerbook/ipod cram and jam. we had macworld. at this point .. pff .. it'll come out when it comes out *shrug*. Why worry our ass off about it now? If it was coming soon (soon enough to warrant all the new threads) it would have been intro'ed at macworld.

[siflippant]

Originally posted by Randman:
Sorry, but gotta rant on this one.
I am truly tired of hearing people ask about G5 PowerBooks as if they'll be some Holy Grail and completely revolutionize computing.
I own a PB17, rev c, and I've worked on G5 PowerMacs and G5 iMacs. And while the desktops are more powerful, in the long run, the increase in power won't be life-altering.
If more people just got a little more ram, performances would increase as much if not more than going to a 1.8 G5.

The PB line will go to G5 at some time, but the PM and iMacs line looks as if it'll be ahead of the curve then. Plus, you have rev a, which I've always been a little leery of.

If you have an older system, get an iMac or PM if you truly crave a G5. If you have a rev b or rev c PB, be happy with it until it's time to upgrade.
But jeez, having people create posts every other day asking if PowerBook G5s are coming around the corner is laughable at this point.

Am I alone in this thinking, or is it that I'm just immune to the Reality Distortion Field on this one?

[travism]

I'm a soon-to-be Mac user who has been waiting for about three months for a PB bump, either to the G5 or just general bumps.

The whole concept of 64-bit computing is mostly a marketing ploy...I mean really, do 98% of the computing public have a need for such a machine? Hell no. Unless you are compiling a lot of code (Say a gentoo linux base 1 install or linux from scratch) or have to do a lot with PhotoShop or massive programs like that, you won't need that extra power.

I think the reason people whine about G5 powerbooks is depreciation value of their purchase. I know I'd be _very_ pissed when I buy my PB and then six months later the G5s come out. Not that my computing needs would change then, it's just that I'd be pissed the re-sale value just halved or worse over night.

I dunno, that's my 2 cents on this.

[iREZ]

I agree with Randman but isn't Tiger going to take advantage of 64bit processing? If so then when Tiger does come out wouldn't the G5's run Tiger better than G4's?

[anamexis]

Even Apple highly recommends that developers not develop their applications for 64 bit unless they absolutely need to address more than 2GB of RAM.

[Lateralus]

Originally posted by iREZ:
I agree with Randman but isn't Tiger going to take advantage of 64bit processing? If so then when Tiger does come out wouldn't the G5's run Tiger better than G4's?

64bit has more to do with memory addressing than anything else.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by Randman:
Sorry, but gotta rant on this one.
I am truly tired of hearing people ask about G5 PowerBooks as if they'll be some Holy Grail and completely revolutionize computing.
I own a PB17, rev c, and I've worked on G5 PowerMacs and G5 iMacs. And while the desktops are more powerful, in the long run, the increase in power won't be life-altering.

You don't do any audio work, do you?

Simply having a 600MHz bus makes a world of difference.

-s*

[Randman]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
You don't do any audio work, do you?

Simply having a 600MHz bus makes a world of difference.

I would think if someone is really into audio and/or video, they'd opt for a PowerMac and get more than the 2GB of ram than fits into a PB.

Don't get wrong, I'll be drooling when one comes out but I just think the majority of people are just hearing G5 PowerBook and losing all sense of reality.

[Link]

I want to get a powerbook this year, and I don't want to get a 2 year old design.. the aluminum, while looks nice, has proven NOT to be as tough as it should be.

So, I'm waiting. It's already well known they probably won't change the case, or the speakers, or put a better screen in the 17", or maybe even the radeon 9800 mobile, until it goes g5...

So why should I get a g4 laptop?

1. Too delicate
2. Not enough cache for a g4
3. 5400rpm drives not standard, 7200 not an option
4. Could have better speakers (not really a big deal)
5. Could have a better res screen
6. (one of my biggest gripes) -- the 9800 is so much better than the 9700 and it's still not in use yet....
7. The design is 2 years old :|

[Randman]

The design is 2 years old? What an silly thing to say. The look is clean and effective.

And I've owned iBooks and my PB17 is plenty tough enough, thanks.

[Lancer409]

i love the design of the current powerbooks. to be honest, i'm almost opposite of link on this one. you think the design is old and tired, and cant wait to see it changed.

i think the design is near perfect, and i hope they dont @#$% it up. (cheapen the look or something)

[velodev]

Originally posted by Randman:
Sorry, but gotta rant on this one.
I am truly tired of hearing people ask about G5 PowerBooks...

Am I alone in this thinking, or is it that I'm just immune to the Reality Distortion Field on this one?

AAAAAAAAAmmmen. I love my 15" AlBook to death. People are acting like the G4 Powerbook is some weakling that can't handle day to day operations.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by Randman:
I would think if someone is really into audio and/or video, they'd opt for a PowerMac and get more than the 2GB of ram than fits into a PB.

HUH?

I'm sorry, but that is just an incredibly stupid argument.

I'm not sure if you've noticed, but the two-three Powerbooks on stage/at the mixing board of virtually every current tour production are NOT running TextEdit and Crystal Quest.

Most of us actually NEED a mobile solution, and many of us simply don't have the cash to shell out an extra $2000+ for a second, stationary system.

I just need a machine that can do 24+ channels of audio (no problem on my Powerbook) that WON'T stutter and die the second I open up a single instance of the Space Designer reverb plug-in (big problem on my Powerbook). And a handful of software instruments.

-s*

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by velodev:
AAAAAAAAAmmmen. I love my 15" AlBook to death. People are acting like the G4 Powerbook is some weakling that can't handle day to day operations.

People are acting like the Powerbooks are machines for handling day-to-day operations.

They're not.

Those day-to-day machines are iBooks. Powerbooks are supposed to be the machines that can handle the most demanding professional-usage tasks, remember?

-s*

[Randman]

And if that's the case for you Spheric, you're an exception not the rule.
I'm not saying the G5s wouldn't be appreciated. All I'm saying is that people asking every day if they are coming out yet is tiresome.

Of course, the G5s will have a performance boost. I'm not denying that. But the G4s right now are very good machines and capable of handling quite a bit. And if they do go to rev d with some improvements, they'll be even better. And I'd say that for a very great majority (especially those crying out for G5 PBs), a G4 will handle most of their tasks with aplomb.

[UnixMac]

I agree Randman...

I also agree that the current Ai design of the PB is perfect, and that Apple had better be careful if they change it, cause it's not likely they can do much to improve it's look. Also, the G5 will necessitate a larger enclosure (especially for cooling), you can bank on it, and that for me is a non-starter for a portable.

[awcopus]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
Most of us actually NEED a mobile solution, and many of us simply don't have the cash to shell out an extra $2000+ for a second, stationary system.

I just need a machine that can do 24+ channels of audio (no problem on my Powerbook) that WON'T stutter and die the second I open up a single instance of the Space Designer reverb plug-in (big problem on my Powerbook). And a handful of software instruments.

-s*

Pretty depressing that "many" people doing the work you describe above aren't being paid enough to invest in a PowerMac as their portable solution. Or are you just resisting the desktop G5 because you think a Powerbook G5 will solve the problem someday. But the PowerBook G5 won't be a duallie, and it sounds like you're opening multiple apps and needing as much online bandwidth as possible.

Frankly, the PowerMac G5 is about as heavy as all of the speakers and mixing board racks and lighting equipment and other stuff you'd need to have on tour, right? It's also as light as a powerbook once it is setup (it's not like you're walking around with your powerbook during performances). So, if this is your profession and the Mac you're using can't handle the load, upgrade to a duallie G5 and use your current PB as your "portable" solution or sell it to finance getting the right tool for your job.

[Spheric Harlot]

I'm sorry to say it, but you really haven't the faintest ****ing clue about live music.

[Drakino]

Originally posted by Link:
6. (one of my biggest gripes) -- the 9800 is so much better than the 9700 and it's still not in use yet...

The only laptop in the world with a Mobility 9800 is the Dell 9100/XPS (same system). You know why? It's not much of a mobile solution. The M18 chip on it is basicially identical to the desktop R420. It puts out heat like crazy, and is only built for systems that have space to implement a massive cooling solution. The Dell system has one fan dedicated to the video card only.

Until Apple moves to the PCI-Express platform in the laptops, don't expect anything more then the Mobility 9700. And the 9700 pretty much matches the Mobility x600 already. The upcoming Mobility x800 is yet again a mobile gaming solution that will require an awesome cooling solution.

The Powerbook line as it stands now represents a true laptop/on the move solution. And thus it lacks a G5, and a Mobility 9800. If Apple releases a 10 pound, 150w 2 inch thick system, then it will have all the high end features people want.

[danny_gasperini]

Originally posted by Randman:
Sorry, but gotta rant on this one.
I am truly tired of hearing people ask about G5 PowerBooks as if they'll be some Holy Grail and completely revolutionize computing.
I own a PB17, rev c, and I've worked on G5 PowerMacs and G5 iMacs. And while the desktops are more powerful, in the long run, the increase in power won't be life-altering.
If more people just got a little more ram, performances would increase as much if not more than going to a 1.8 G5.

The PB line will go to G5 at some time, but the PM and iMacs line looks as if it'll be ahead of the curve then. Plus, you have rev a, which I've always been a little leery of.

If you have an older system, get an iMac or PM if you truly crave a G5. If you have a rev b or rev c PB, be happy with it until it's time to upgrade.
But jeez, having people create posts every other day asking if PowerBook G5s are coming around the corner is laughable at this point.

Am I alone in this thinking, or is it that I'm just immune to the Reality Distortion Field on this one?

Ugh! I couldn't agree more!!!
People are all too easily swayed by marketing. Maybe this is why 95% of computer users use Windows because it's "better" - Microsoft says so!

The Power 4 derived PPC 970 IBM processor was originally designed for blade servers and nodes. It was stripped down and refined for a desktop computer application (what Apple ultimately called the G5). Right from the start there was no intention on IBMs part to use the 130nm or even 90nm process PPC 970 for a portable. It uses too much power, and therefore generates too much heat while sucking the battery down like there's no tomorrow.

I believe that Apple might have trapped themselves a bit with the G5 processor. People look at the G5 and say "well, this is a Generation newer than the G4, so it must be better". In fact, as I pointed out the G5 is not an evolution of the G4, it has come from a completely different origin. I believe that Apple need to look at possibly even renaming their G4 processor to something like a G5M or something like that. Intel has the Pentium IV, and the Pentium M. 2 distinct lines of processor to do 2 very different things. From a marketing perspective this also works as you don't have people saying "when are they going to put a G5 in a portable"!!! You would have the G5 from IBM in desktops and the G5M from Motorola (or maybe even IBM down the line as well) in laptops.

Clock for clock the IBM G5 is very comparable to the Motorola G4. Until you start breaking 1.8-2.0GHz the speed differential is not noticeable for the majority of applications (unless you obviously start adding Dual Processors). So adding a 1.8GHz IBM G5 into a laptop at the moment would do not much more than burn a hole in your trousers while giving you an extra 2 fps in UT2K4!

64 bit computing is the other bug bear I have!!! Yes the IBM processor is a 64 bit processor - so this means that it executes twice as much data in the same process right? WRONG!!! It simply has to do with memory addressing, and the benefits of this do not show through until you start exceeding 2-4Gb. It does not mean that Tiger will run faster on a 64 bit processor v's a 32 bit processor - so lets get that straight from the start! Hopefully this thread will be the last we hear about this for a while.

Huh! Yeah right, I'm not holding my breath!

[Spheric Harlot]

True, the G5 may not handle much more than the G4 cycle-for-cycle.

But a 600MHz frontside bus and TRUE double-data-rate memory will easily increase data throughput several-fold over the 167MHz bus the current G4 Powerbooks run on.

That's not just marketing.

[tooki]

Look! You're already discussing the G5 PowerBook again!

The whole point of this thread is to make clear that the discussion is futile -- you gain NOTHING by discussing it now. As far as it concerns any of us, it does not exist. (Even if it does exist in an Apple development lab, that is of no service to us in any way.)

I agree that all this nonsense talk about the PBG5 should stop.

tooki

P.S. Spheric: you're right, and I agree that for live music, the G5 architecture would be nice. But it doesn't exist now. Drop it.

[danny_gasperini]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
True, the G5 may not handle much more than the G4 cycle-for-cycle.

But a 600MHz frontside bus and TRUE double-data-rate memory will easily increase data throughput several-fold over the 167MHz bus the current G4 Powerbooks run on.

That's not just marketing.

True. So if it has a 600MHz FSB, then why isn't a PM1.8GHz/9600 getting 3x or 2x or even 30% more fps than a 1.5GHz PB/9700? All other things being equal.

[Fiete5401]

Originally posted by tooki:
Look! You're already discussing the G5 PowerBook again!

The whole point of this thread is to make clear that the discussion is futile -- you gain NOTHING by discussing it now. As far as it concerns any of us, it does not exist. (Even if it does exist in an Apple development lab, that is of no service to us in any way.)

I agree that all this nonsense talk about the PBG5 should stop.

Hehe, you should write a script to delete all threads that contain 'G5' automatically.

[hldan]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
True, the G5 may not handle much more than the G4 cycle-for-cycle.

But a 600MHz frontside bus and TRUE double-data-rate memory will easily increase data throughput several-fold over the 167MHz bus the current G4 Powerbooks run on.

That's not just marketing.

The higher bus speeds go hand in hand with the type of processor.THe clock amount is made up by an algorithm as it is in PC's. The 167Mhz is the true amount of bus speed and is the same as any PC in the 400-800Mhz class depending on if it's a P4 or Pentium M.
Must we go through the Mhz race again? The speed on the Powerbooks smokes, obviously enough to run a second PC operating system.

[MORT A POTTY]

Originally posted by danny_gasperini:
True. So if it has a 600MHz FSB, then why isn't a PM1.8GHz/9600 getting 3x or 2x or even 30% more fps than a 1.5GHz PB/9700? All other things being equal.

you obviously are talking about games and not media recording/production. if you were, you'd realize that you have no case trying to preach that a 167Mhz bus is just as good as a 600Mhz FSB. it isn't and this is a really important issue in recording and mixing.

[danny_gasperini]

Originally posted by MORT A POTTY:
you obviously are talking about games and not media recording/production. if you were, you'd realize that you have no case trying to preach that a 167Mhz bus is just as good as a 600Mhz FSB. it isn't and this is a really important issue in recording and mixing.

I'm not trying to preach. I'm just stating the cold hard facts. BTW, yes I was refering to games. Last time I checked they were a good indicator of overall system architecture performance.

[awcopus]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
I'm sorry to say it, but you really haven't the faintest ****ing clue about live music.

Whoa there Mr. Harlot, whoa.

I was just saying that it sounds like you need a G5 today, and that they're available, but the fact that they're not available in your preferred form factor means you're depriving yourself of power you could really use.

Maybe the ONLY way for your setup to work is with a portable Mac, but that seems strange to me, having seen setups in theaters where a desktop Mac is used to run music and lighting.

No offense intended. Good luck.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by awcopus:
Whoa there Mr. Harlot, whoa.

I was just saying that it sounds like you need a G5 today, and that they're available, but the fact that they're not available in your preferred form factor means you're depriving yourself of power you could really use.

Maybe the ONLY way for your setup to work is with a portable Mac, but that seems strange to me, having seen setups in theaters where a desktop Mac is used to run music and lighting.

No offense intended. Good luck.

I'm sorry, but the misconception starts with your incredulousness that people in the musical profession should be paid so little as to not be able to afford a secondary rig.

Well, no sh!t, Sherlock.

That musicians are, in general, not making *any* money should not come as any sort of surprise unless you really haven't the slightest idea of the business.

And no, if you're playing as one of eight bands at a festival, with a ten-minute set-up time and heavy space constraints (not to mention a single van for four people and the entire backline), then whupping a dual-G5 and a cinema display onto stage is simply not an option. In fact, if you're not the Rolling Stones, chances are that a keyboard setup will consist of two 'boards, a stand, and whatever will fit in a backpack.

G5 tower, my ass. "You're obviously making the wrong decisions", my ass.

-s*

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by danny_gasperini:
I'm not trying to preach. I'm just stating the cold hard facts. BTW, yes I was refering to games. Last time I checked they were a good indicator of overall system architecture performance.

Unfortunately, game FPS have nothing whatsoever to do with media production.

At least not with audio.

You know, sound - the stuff that works equally well with a Rage IIc. No OpenGL involved. Yeah, that stuff.

-s*

[awcopus]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
I'm sorry, but the misconception starts with your incredulousness that people in the musical profession should be paid so little as to not be able to afford a secondary rig.

Well, no sh!t, Sherlock.

That musicians are, in general, not making *any* money should not come as any sort of surprise unless you really haven't the slightest idea of the business.

And no, if you're playing as one of eight bands at a festival, with a ten-minute set-up time and heavy space constraints (not to mention a single van for four people and the entire backline), then whupping a dual-G5 and a cinema display onto stage is simply not an option. In fact, if you're not the Rolling Stones, chances are that a keyboard setup will consist of two 'boards, a stand, and whatever will fit in a backpack.

G5 tower, my ass. "You're obviously making the wrong decisions", my ass.

-s*

You can't control when Apple is going to deliver the product you want, so if your needs are pressing, you should maybe improvise. If your needs aren't emergent, maybe you should try calming down.

I'd probably be a clueless a-hole to suggest that perhaps you could use an iMac G5 for your purposes? It's got something like the bus speed you want, the monitor's built-in, and the hard drive is *much* faster than the one in a Powerbook. You can even take the stand off the back of the iMac if that makes it fit your rig better. So you have to lug a keyboard and mouse, at least you're running a G5, right?

[gururafiki]

Originally posted by awcopus:
You can't control when Apple is going to deliver the product you want, so if your needs are pressing, you should maybe improvise. If your needs aren't emergent, maybe you should try calming down.

I'd probably be a clueless a-hole to suggest that perhaps you could use an iMac G5 for your purposes? It's got something like the bus speed you want, the monitor's built-in, and the hard drive is *much* faster than the one in a Powerbook. You can even take the stand off the back of the iMac if that makes it fit your rig better. So you have to lug a keyboard and mouse, at least you're running a G5, right?

But the imac can only hold 2 gigs of ram. The Powermac can hold 8+ gigs. granted the current powerbooks can only support 2 gigs of ram like the current imac's. Since the Powerbook is a professional line of laptops, one would expect the Powerbook G5 would hold 2+ gigs of ram, which is one of the main benefits of a G5.

[vmarks]

Originally posted by awcopus:
Pretty depressing that "many" people doing the work you describe above aren't being paid enough to invest in a PowerMac as their portable solution. Or are you just resisting the desktop G5 because you think a Powerbook G5 will solve the problem someday. But the PowerBook G5 won't be a duallie, and it sounds like you're opening multiple apps and needing as much online bandwidth as possible.

Frankly, the PowerMac G5 is about as heavy as all of the speakers and mixing board racks and lighting equipment and other stuff you'd need to have on tour, right? It's also as light as a powerbook once it is setup (it's not like you're walking around with your powerbook during performances). So, if this is your profession and the Mac you're using can't handle the load, upgrade to a duallie G5 and use your current PB as your "portable" solution or sell it to finance getting the right tool for your job.

Limited space in the van/truck/hatchback. One coffin case for the midi controller and mixing board and audio interface to powerbook.
One laptop bag containing powerbook.

Ability to get set up quickly with a minimum of fuss, cables, no requirement for an extra display and its extra power cable.

My setup doesn't describe that of many musicians who find they need a few extra pieces or even another powerbook- but even so, two powerbooks take up less space than one powermac g5.

[nsxpower]

I don't think anyone really cares whether it will be a G5, a dual core G4 or some different PPC chip in the next PowerBook ... what people want to see is a "significant" upgrade.
I am still using my 1Ghz TiBook and I am holding off upgrading for a couple of reasons:

* I feel that a significant update to the PowerBook line is around the corner. It's been two years since 167Mhz bus was introduced and all we've seen since were marginal G4 speed bumps. Further more, the next "significant" PowerBook revision will likely half or worse the resale price of current AlBooks.

* Current AlBooks offer a marginally faster bus 167 v 133 and faster processors that probably add up to a 20-35% overall speed improvement. Which is nice, but I want to see a 200+ bus that will dramatically improve performance ... more so than any G4 speed bump. I am desperately waiting for 400-600 Mhz busses to make their way into PowerBooks.

* I would also like to see Apple use higher res. LCDs in PowerBooks. I doubt it'll happen, but one can hope.

The problem is that the next Freescale G4 advetizes a 200Mhz FSB and even that chip is at least 6 months away. In the current form G5 is too hot to be put in the PowerBook ... lets hope a miracle happens because another year of marginal G4 speed bumps will do some serious damage to Apple.

[Randman]

Originally posted by nsxpower:
I don't think anyone really cares whether it will be a G5, a dual core G4 or some different PPC chip in the next PowerBook ... what people want to see is a "significant" upgrade.

While the PowerBook line could stand a tweak, I still say it's not going to be so significant as to be revolutionary, which is what half of the threads asking about G5s are crying out for.
Does anyone really think the PBs will jump to 2.0? That would be a significant jump from the current 1.5 but most places talking about rev ds are mentioned 1.67.

Again, I reiterate (since the thread was hijacked about audio discussion): The G5s are going to be an improvement, of course, but the G4 PowerBooks (15s and 17s, mostly) are damn fine machines already.

And the people crying for G5 PowerBooks are likely going to be the first people bitching about the specs and how they're not what they should be.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by awcopus:
You can't control when Apple is going to deliver the product you want, so if your needs are pressing, you should maybe improvise. If your needs aren't emergent, maybe you should try calming down.

I'd probably be a clueless a-hole to suggest that perhaps you could use an iMac G5 for your purposes? It's got something like the bus speed you want, the monitor's built-in, and the hard drive is *much* faster than the one in a Powerbook. You can even take the stand off the back of the iMac if that makes it fit your rig better. So you have to lug a keyboard and mouse, at least you're running a G5, right?

Actually, that's a pretty good suggestion, and I know a lot of my colleagues *are* looking into that.

The 2-GB RAM limit isn't so relevant, since a laptop likely won't have more than two slots either, and AFAIK the largest size available is 1GB per slot.

However, I *do* require a backpack solution, for various reasons.

I'm up for a new machine come this fall either way (dual G4 or G5), so we'll see what Apple has to offer me then.

And I just get annoyed when people tell me what my needs are, and what's relevant for me and what not, all while making incorrect assumptions about a business they have no idea of, and then have the gall to point out that something must be wrong if people aren't making enough money to afford two $3000 systems.

-s*

[Randman]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
And I just get annoyed when people tell me what my needs are, and what's relevant for me and what not, all while making incorrect assumptions about a business they have no idea of, and then have the gall to point out that something must be wrong if people aren't making enough money to afford two $3000 systems.

None of which has anything to do with this thread, mind you.

[Crusoe]

I can't imagine seeing a G5 PB for a long, long time. And the repetitive threads of when, followed by prophetic specs is silly, new threads should be locked until we see reports of mass production 75nm G5s or lower.

After endless arguments on why people need a G5 portable, many end up over bus speed which is valid but they're basing them on preditions of a 600Mhz bus or faster. These things could come out as 1.6s at 267, 1.8s with 300Mhz or even 2.0s with 250Mhz. Would these be better than dual core G4s or or be the all satifying solution?

Solutions to slowing the new threads:
Convince Apple to publish their PB roadmap. (Never going to happen)
Someone write a book on how to create a custom G5 portable using iMac/PB Parts and a metal shop. (Any EEs out there with money and perhaps houses to burn?)
Apple announces G6.

This thread should be sticky till we hear of 75nm or smaller G5s in mass production.

[awcopus]

Yeah, I've got the 2.5 duallie, and when I do renders in FCP or Motion, the fans spin up over the HDs and in front of the processors and the air coming out of the back vents is just short of hot. And this is with liquid cooling and an entire front and back enclosure with holes in it. G5 XServes run quite hot (no way would you want this in your lap). Haven't felt the iMac G5, but I bet that enclosure gets pretty warm.

I think Apple's going to be thrilled to offer faster G4-based Powerbooks for a while, maybe another year, folks. As I am in the market for a Powerbook, I find this a little frustrating, but I'll be happy to get whatever the next upgrade is, even if it's the last G4 Powerbook ever, as I believe gen1 G5 Powerbooks will probably be not dramatically superior to it (though the marketing blitz undoubtedly will be pretty intense).

[shabbasuraj]

Meanwhile RevD PB's finally anounced in late January!!!!!!

http://mammals.org/

[MORT A POTTY]

personally I'd rather not have a G5 PowerBook for quite a while. I'd rather they go to a dual core G4 w/ 667Mhz system bus. This seems to be much further along than a low power 970 variant.

[nsxpower]

Originally posted by MORT A POTTY:
personally I'd rather not have a G5 PowerBook for quite a while. I'd rather they go to a dual core G4 w/ 667Mhz system bus. This seems to be much further along than a low power 970 variant.

I'd be thrilled to see that happen. The only problem is that high-end (667Mhz bus speed) e600 PowerPC� processors will take a long time to make it into PowerBooks. So overall we are still in for a long wait.
My best guess is that we'll see a bump to 1.67Ghz w/in a month, then some time in the fall a bump to 200Mhz bus w/ the 7448 and next spring/summer ('07) we may see 8641 based PowerBooks with 667Mhz bus and some with dual core (8641D) chips. Seems like a likely deveopment to me considering that either chip is 6 - 12 months away from production.

[UnixMac]

Originally posted by awcopus:
You can't control when Apple is going to deliver the product you want, so if your needs are pressing, you should maybe improvise. If your needs aren't emergent, maybe you should try calming down.

I'd probably be a clueless a-hole to suggest that perhaps you could use an iMac G5 for your purposes? It's got something like the bus speed you want, the monitor's built-in, and the hard drive is *much* faster than the one in a Powerbook. You can even take the stand off the back of the iMac if that makes it fit your rig better. So you have to lug a keyboard and mouse, at least you're running a G5, right?

Thats actually a good idea... I'm not pro musician, but I play the Bass in a "cover band" and have a rather large rig myself (Specter NS2 & Alembic Europa, GK Amp/4X cabinet, and Alesis Midiverb4, one peddle) so I appreciate the hell in setting up fast for a show (which my band dose at most once per month)... but an iMac G5 is actually very portable, I got one for my mom and with wireless keyboard and mouse it's just 1 plug and bang! you're a portable G5 1.6 with 2GB RAM and a 7200RPM drive!

[Pierre B.]

Originally posted by nsxpower:
The only problem is that high-end (667Mhz bus speed) e600 PowerPC? processors will take a long time to make it into PowerBooks. So overall we are still in for a long wait.
My best guess is that we'll see a bump to 1.67Ghz w/in a month, then some time in the fall a bump to 200Mhz bus w/ the 7448 and next spring/summer ('07) we may see 8641 based PowerBooks with 667Mhz bus and some with dual core (8641D) chips. Seems like a likely deveopment to me considering that either chip is 6 - 12 months away from production.

Exactly my thoughts for the route the Powerbooks will take this year. The Freescale chips (7448 and 8641D) are the only ones which are suitable for mobile applications and for which we know there is active development. From the IBM side there is no word about mobile chips.

This is one thing.

But I think we should drop the Powerbook G5 idea for another reason too. As you probably know, Intel already showed off its dual-core chip, Yonah, based on the powerful Dothan core. Yonah is developed in 65nm process and will go to full production in 2006. Now, the Dothan version of P-M (available today) is powerful enough to challenge even a G5 in the range 2-2.5 GHz. So, in a year from now, or a little more, we will have dual-core x86 laptops, with the highly efficient but quite powerful Dothan processors. In view of this threat, I don't think it would interesting for Apple to develop a single-core G5 Powerbook. It will be just unable to stand against the forthcoming competition.

So, instead of "for when a Powerbook G5", it makes more sense to ask "what news from Freescale".

[hldan]

Originally posted by Pierre B.:
Exactly my thoughts for the route the Powerbooks will take this year. The Freescale chips (7448 and 8641D) are the only ones which are suitable for mobile applications and for which we know there is active development. From the IBM side there is no word about mobile chips.

This is one thing.

But I think we should drop the Powerbook G5 idea for another reason too. As you probably know, Intel already showed off its dual-core chip, Yonah, based on the powerful Dothan core. Yonah is developed in 65nm process and will go to full production in 2006. Now, the Dothan version of P-M (available today) is powerful enough to challenge even a G5 in the range 2-2.5 GHz. So, in a year from now, or a little more, we will have dual-core x86 laptops, with the highly efficient but quite powerful Dothan processors. In view of this threat, I don't think it would interesting for Apple to develop a single-core G5 Powerbook. It will be just unable to stand against the forthcoming competition.

So, instead of "for when a Powerbook G5", it makes more sense to ask "what news from Freescale".

U R fulla sheeot if you think a Pentium M is powerful enough to challange a G5 especially clock speed for clock speed. You sound more pro-Intel.

[MORT A POTTY]

Originally posted by hldan:
U R fulla sheeot if you think a Pentium M is powerful enough to challange a G5 especially clock speed for clock speed. You sound more pro-Intel.

I dont know that it would challenge a 2.5Ghz G5... but the Pentium M is a very good chip.

[hldan]

Originally posted by MORT A POTTY:
I dont know that it would challenge a 2.5Ghz G5... but the Pentium M is a very good chip.

Not even any of the current G5's. We are talking about a laptop computer challanging a desktop G5. The Centrino's may give the 1.5Ghz G4's a run for their money but never the G5's.
I don't know why the speed race is still important anymore now that all the current Macs run OSX perfectly with nearly all the current apps and games.
This forum spends more time comparing what's least important, a Wintel PC's speed over the processor used in Macs and the real comparison only needs to be Windows vs. Mac. The fastest Intel processor still has to power up Windows.
So it's totally unnecessary to concern ourselves about faster processors for the Powerbooks that will challange an Intel chip. Intel's not that great anyway, AMD is the king in the PC world.

[Pierre B.]

Originally posted by hldan:
U R fulla sheeot if you think a Pentium M is powerful enough to challange a G5 especially clock speed for clock speed. You sound more pro-Intel.

Sorry, but benchmarks indicate that last year's Dothans are equivalent to 2 GHz Athlons FX. See here. So, is the G5 at 2 GHz so much more powerful than the equally clocked Athlon?

[hldan]

Originally posted by Pierre B.:
Sorry, but benchmarks indicate that last year's Dothans are equivalent to 2 GHz Athlons FX. See here. So, is the G5 at 2 GHz so much more powerful than the equally clocked Athlon?

Again, my previous statement stands strong. The only speed comparisons that are important are Intel chips vs. AMD chips.If you are buying a Mac computer then these speed tests are irrelevent if you really think about it. I could see your point if you could buy a Mac and have the processor chip of your choice but that ain't the case.