[Commodus]

Alrighty, if MacBidouille's info is accurate (and it might be), here's some updated guesstimates.

12" PowerBook

- 1.13 GHz G4 with 512K L2 cache
- 133 MHz system bus
- 256 MB DDR266 memory
- 60/80 GB hard drive
- 64 MB GeForce FX 5200 Go video
- Combo or 2X Superdrive
- $1599

15" PowerBook

- 1.25 GHz G4 with 512K L2, 1 MB L3 caches
- 167 MHz system bus
- 512 MB DDR333 memory
- 60/80 GB hard drive
- 64 MB GeForce FX 5600 Go video
- Combo or 2X Superdrive
- Airport Extreme card included!
- $2299

17" PowerBook

- 1.33 GHz G4 with 512K L2, 1 MB L3 caches
- 167 MHz system bus
- 512 MB DDR333 memory
- 80 GB hard drive
- 64 MB Mobility Radeon 9600 video
- 2X Superdrive
- Airport Extreme card included
- $2799

So in other words: back to a simpler product matrix (i.e. you don't have 15" systems with different performance, just features) but also with clearer advantages to going for a higher-end model over a lower-end one. The 12" is actually likely to get the biggest benefit here; right now it's pretty hobbled with only a 256K L2 cache. Doubling that, increasing the clock speed by a third, and improving the video chipset would all make a huge difference.

Does anyone notice, by the way, that this conveniently leaves room for the iBook to move up to as much as a 1 GHz G4? It would be a good way to reinforce that whole "year of the notebook" statement at the start of the year. I'm sure that Apple isn't too eager to have three generations of processors in their lineup for much longer, as well...

[NeXTLoop]

Actually your specs look pretty reasonable. I'd say that's about as good a guess as any.... with a couple of exceptions...

1). I think the 17" will probably have 2MB of Level 3 Cache.

2). I don't think the prices will be that low. Personally, I don't see them being any lower than they are now on the 15" and 17".

Course, I hope I'm wrong on the price.

[clf8]

Originally posted by Commodus:
15" PowerBook

- 1.25 GHz G4 with 512K L2, 1 MB L3 caches
- 167 MHz system bus
- 512 MB DDR333 memory
- 60/80 GB hard drive
- 64 MB GeForce FX 5600 Go video
- Combo or 2X Superdrive
- Airport Extreme card included!
- $2299

No Mobility 9600 in the 15"? Why support 3 different video cards instead of just two, with 3 different motherboard layouts? Oh well, I quit trying to figure out Apple years ago.

[Esquare]

Originally posted by clf8:
No Mobility 9600 in the 15"? Why support 3 different video cards instead of just two, with 3 different motherboard layouts? Oh well, I quit trying to figure out Apple years ago.

Better quit trying to figure out all these rumor sites.

[Simon]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
I have a 15" Gigabook SD.

It's not a question of what anybody owns or doesn't own.

It's about the absolutely unnecessary constant bitching and whining about what features the 12" lacks and needs within the next 36 hours if Apple doesn't want to go chapter 11 yadda yadda...

The 12" demonstrates that you can have all the necessary goodies in a very small package. There is the 17" for people that want a PowerMac to go. It's a fine machine for those that like carrying around big amounts of expensive ballast to show off. The 12" is not meant for those.

What the 12" needs is a better CPU (L3), a better GPU (Radeon 9600 Mob) and DVI-out. That's it. No new features. If something gets added it should be a new smaller case, not a larger one.

Commodus, nice specs. Seem pretty likely. I don't see however why Apple should use three different GPUs.

Generally, I still don't understand why Apple thinks they need different CPU speeds for the three PowerBook sizes. It's about weight and screen size and should not be about CPU power.

Nobody here has been able to explain this to me. If Apple wants to lure people to machines with higher margins, then they should make an expensive 12" with a SuperDrive and the fastest CPU around. No way in the world will somebody looking for a small powerful PowerBook go 17" just because the 12" has a slower CPU. In fact, Apple is getting less margin with this strategy, because buyers like me will just go with the cheap 12" no matter what speed the G4 in there has. Rather stupid, but honestly, since when has Apple Marketing been known to be clever?

[Eug]

It's about the absolutely unnecessary constant bitching and whining about what features the 12" lacks and needs within the next 36 hours if Apple doesn't want to go chapter 11 yadda yadda...

Who said anything about Apple going Chapter 11?

What the 12 " needs is a better CPU (L3), a better GPU (Radeon 9600 Mob) and DVI-out. That's it. No new features. If something gets added it should be a new smaller case, not a larger one.

See my previous posts, and see your own post above. Wouldn't ya think that an L3, top-of-the-line laptop video, DVI, and smaller case would be FOUR new features? That's what I want too. Basically I said I'd consider buying a smaller faster DVI 12" PowerPB (although if possible I'd like the bonus of a PCMCIA slot too).

[Simon]

Originally posted by Eug:
See my previous posts, and see your own post above. Wouldn't ya think that an L3, top-of-the-line laptop video, DVI, and smaller case would be FOUR new features?

No, they are not new features. They are enhancements to features that are already built into the PowerBook. L3 is an enhancement to the CPU or its bus, 9600 is an enhancement of the video-out circuitry already on-board, DVI is already on the GPU, it just need to be wired to the outside instead of VGA, smaller case already says smaller, it doesn't mean addtional. Is that clear enough for you? Improve the existing, not implement additional baloney.

PC Card slots is an additional gimmick that uses space, offers almost no benefit and is used by only a very small fraction of users. It would be stupid to put it in there. And I find it stupid to say that "the 12" PowerBook lacks PC Card slots" as some here did. That is the point, but granted, you tried really hard to misunderstand me.

[clf8]

Originally posted by Simon:
What the 12" needs is a better CPU (L3), a better GPU (Radeon 9600 Mob) and DVI-out. That's it. No new features. If something gets added it should be a new smaller case, not a larger one.

Playin with a 12" this weekend at Frye's, the thing really does get hot. There's a good chance the 9600 Mobility is too much for it.

As for DVI, I'll try and justify Apple's decision. Think of the 12" as a travelling executive's or salesman's powerbook. When you walk into a presentation, whatever you're hooking into (projector, most likely) to display will have either VGA or s-video. Sure, we'd all love DVI out, but I think Apple went the right way on this one.

Another Tuesday gone....

[Simon]

Originally posted by clf8:
As for DVI, I'll try and justify Apple's decision. Think of the 12" as a travelling executive's or salesman's powerbook. When you walk into a presentation, whatever you're hooking into (projector, most likely) to display will have either VGA or s-video. Sure, we'd all love DVI out, but I think Apple went the right way on this one.

If it had DVI out people could hook it up to older VGA beamers with a simple dongle because DVI carries the analog signal as well. The other way around however is a no-go.

The decision Apple made was done for marketing reasons alone and was entirely stupid. They crippled the 12" because they wanted people to step up to the more expensive 15". But actually, the 12" is the PowerBook that needs external video most, since at the office or at home you would probably want to hook it up to a big screen. Technically they did the opposite of what would be desired. I guess Phil won over Ruby...

[Eug]

No, they are not new features. They are enhancements to features that are already built into the PowerBook. L3 is an enhancement to the CPU or its bus, 9600 is an enhancement of the video-out circuitry already on-board, DVI is already on the GPU, it just need to be wired to the outside instead of VGA, smaller case already says smaller, it doesn't mean addtional. Is that clear enough for you? Improve the existing, not implement additional baloney.

Sorry but despite your rationalization, those are features, and often are marketed as such, even by Apple.

PC Card slots is an additional gimmick that uses space, offers almost no benefit and is used by only a very small fraction of users. It would be stupid to put it in there. And I find it stupid to say that "the 12" PowerBook lacks PC Card slots" as some here did. That is the point, but granted, you tried really hard to misunderstand me.

As is obvious judging by the many posts on this forum, PCMCIA is a desirable feature to have for many. Indeed, if it weren't it wouldn't exist on either the 15" or 17" PowerBooks. eg. Apple has deemed PCMCIA much more important than either SCSI or parallel, and has thus has eliminated those ports but kept PCMCIA. And I would agree with Apple's designers there. It's not a make or break FEATURE, but it is important enough for Apple to continue including it at least on some of their laptops.

[Naz]

this is a little OT but I'm trying to follow this thread so whats this

<---- what does it mean?

poke poke poke

what does it mean when you used it



wake me when the New PBs get here

[Commodus]

Simon:

Thanks for the compliment on my prediction, it's appreciated.

The main reason I chose what I did for CPU/GPU features is because of heat, power and price concerns. If MacBidouille is to believed, you'd get the 1.13 GHz G4 in the 12" because that's as much as it could handle without heat being an issue (or perhaps more of an issue). I don't know if that would be true for the 15" and 17" models. The same goes for graphics chips: an FX 5200 Go is probably not going to take up as much space or produce as much heat/power as a higher-end chip.

For all models, cost would matter too. An FX 5200 is going to cost less than a Mobility Radeon 9600, a 1.13 GHz G4 will cost less than a 1.33 GHz model, and so on. I know that some people want no compromises aside from the size, but not everyone would be willing to pay the premium to do it. A lot of people are looking at the 12" PowerBook as an iBook with a few extra features.

[Simon]

Originally posted by Commodus:
Simon:
Thanks for the compliment on my prediction, it's appreciated.

I see your points and I understand your arguments. That's why your suggestion seemed very likely to me.

I don't agree with all of the aspects of your prediction personally, but nevertheless I believe Apple will do pretty closely what you suggest.

[Simon]

Originally posted by Eug:
Sorry but despite your rationalization, those are features, and often are marketed as such, even by Apple.

They may be marketed as anything - we all agree on that. But technically it's clear that a 9600 Mobility is an enhanced graphics chip subset and not entirely new functionality. It doesn't offer anything new, it just does everything faster and thus, for most users, it does it better.

As is obvious judging by the many posts on this forum, PCMCIA is a desirable feature to have for many. Indeed, if it weren't it wouldn't exist on either the 15" or 17" PowerBooks. eg. Apple has deemed PCMCIA much more important than either SCSI or parallel, and has thus has eliminated those ports but kept PCMCIA.

It is rather simple to try to use this thread as proof for PCMCIA being desired by users. Some time ago there was an article (quoted on this board btw) about how Apple had found that only about 10% of their mobile customers actually use PCMCIA. An even smaller percentage used it on a regular basis and relied on it. I have tried searching the forums for the link, but I can't find it. So, feel free to show me other numbers if you have some.

Now, we could go on discussing the necessity of PCMCIA slots forever, but maybe we can agree on a couple of points:

- a majority of Apple's portable users do not use PCMCIA

- of the minority that uses them a large fraction does not rely solely on them, i.e. if you want to read Flash cards you could also use a USB or FireWire reader which are actually even faster as I hear

- the success of the 12" PowerBook (it was in the top ten seller on the AppleStore for weeks - ahead of the 15" and the 17") underlines this. People buy a notebook because of the size, CPU power and maybe because of optical drives. Certainly, a majority doesn't care about PCMCIA.


Therefore I conclude,

- it is certainly not right to make a mojority of the users pay for this feature, let alone make them carry around a larger Book just because a single-digit percentage absolutely needs the feature

- the majority gets the deals, the exotics have to pay more. That's the way all businesses work. Notebooks should be no different.

I'm not saying Apple should drop PCMCIA from the 17" since it obviously fits in where otherwise just void space would have been left. But I object strongly to making the 12" fatter or wider for all buyers, just because maybe 5% want a gimmick.

I'm sure 5% would also like built-in video cameras, TV tuners, cell phone capabilities, beer taps, etc. Nevertheless, Apple doesn't do it for good reasons. With PCMCIA on the small, light sub-PowerBook it should be no different.

[Edit: Sorry, post got very long]

[Simon]

Originally posted by Naz:
this is a little OT but I'm trying to follow this thread so whats this

<---- what does it mean?

poke poke poke

what does it mean when you used it

I asked the same question a couple of months ago in this forum.

The answer I got was that it was about a yellow guy, poking a blue guy with a stick and telling him, "hey, you're blue".

So actually, I guess most people here, will agree it has something to do with poking the other guy. As in, "hey, don't ya get it". At least I guess that was how Eug, Eug Wanker and I were using it.

Speaking about Eug Wanker, what is the relationship between Eug and Eug Wanker? An idol and his fan? One and the same guy? Schizophrenia? And what about the wanker part? At least where I come from, that means something I can hardly imagine a guy wants to be called... Did I miss something here?

[Eug]

a majority of Apple's portable users do not use PCMCIA

And even less would likely use DVI or Gigabit Ethernet.

of the minority that uses them a large fraction does not rely solely on them, i.e. if you want to read Flash cards you could also use a USB or FireWire reader which are actually even faster as I hear

USB is MUCH slower. Firewire and PCMCIA are in the same ballpark for flash transfers with the edge going to Firewire. But Firewire readers are fairly bulky. Plus as you know, PCMCIA is a flexible port, not solely for flash card readers, etc.

the majority gets the deals, the exotics have to pay more.

And indeed, I'd pay more for a small PowerBook with a better quality screen (better backlight), DVI, and PCMCIA. But again, I will reiterate that I'd settle for just the first two. But I doubt we'll be seeing DVI in the 12" any time soon. (Actually my ideal would be a 13" PowerBook, to decrease the screen dpi - 106 is too high IMO. Would that be enough to hold a PCMCIA slot? I'd pay in between a 12" and a 15" PowerBook for the 13" PowerBook.)

Speaking about Eug Wanker, what is the relationship between Eug and Eug Wanker? An idol and his fan? One and the same guy? Schizophrenia? And what about the wanker part? At least where I come from, that means something I can hardly imagine a guy wants to be called...

Same guy. I used this name for another account elsewhere because "Eug" was taken already. (P.S "Eug" sounds like "huge"... Thus, I found the new name amusing at the time... )

[Simon]

Originally posted by Eug:
And even less would likely use DVI or Gigabit Ethernet.

Not true. DVI is the only way to connect a PowerBook to an Apple display w/o expensive third-party hardware. Again, DVI is an evolution of VGA so to say and therefore it makes sense for Apple to incorporate it, but PCMCIA is hardly an evolution of the SuperDrive or of FireWire.

Plus as you know, PCMCIA is a flexible port, not solely for flash card readers, etc.

But it's flexibility that is mainly only needed by PC users. We already have internal 802.11b/g cards, we already have USB andFireWire, we already have fast Ethernet, etc. We have all those goodies internally already. Some PC users need (or think they need) to be able to add that stuff - Mac users don't.

But I doubt we'll be seeing DVI in the 12" any time soon.

I doubt that as well. I think we will have to be happy if they just push the G4 and the GPU. If we get a 7457 or a 7457-RM we will be probably as close to heaven as possible. At least for 2003/2004.

(Actually my ideal would be a 13" PowerBook, to decrease the screen dpi - 106 is too high IMO. Would that be enough to hold a PCMCIA slot? I'd pay in between a 12" and a 15" PowerBook for the 13" PowerBook.)

I don't know. The way it is now, everybody is baffled about the 12" being so small and still having all the goodies. If it is pushed to 13" I doubt it would retain the very small feel it has. But of course that's very subjective. The 14" iBook comes to my mind which I find is terribly bulky and ugly while offering not more - it's still just an inexpensive iBook.

I understand th 106dpi problem. 1024x768 on 12" is the max. But, at the same time it is very competitive when you look at PC notebooks. Dell loves to advertise the 1600x1200 on their 15" books and I find that a ridiculously high resolution. A co-worker has one of those. The poor sucker didn't get Linux put on it by our lab's IT guys, so he used the default XP for a while. In Word he was looking at pages with 200% magnification. Great.

The screen quality on the 12" PowerBook seems really good to me. Nice colors and nice and sharp resolution. I believe that really impresses PC people. Especially when you compare it to smaller el-cheapo no-name books.

Same guy. I used this name for another account elsewhere because "Eug" was taken already. (P.S "Eug" sounds like "huge"... Thus, I found the new name amusing at the time... )

So that would be huge wanker?

Really?

LOL.

I doubt around here, guys would talk of themselves as being huge wankers.

[clf8]

Originally posted by Simon:
Not true. DVI is the only way to connect a PowerBook to an Apple display w/o expensive third-party hardware.

And, Simon was right that DVI carried the analog signal, so it should be easy enough to do a VGA dongle. I would rather have DVI/VGA over VGA/s-video. Oh, I dunno.

But it's flexibility that is mainly only needed by PC users. We already have internal 802.11b/g cards, we already have USB andFireWire, we already have fast Ethernet, etc. We have all those goodies internally already. Some PC users need (or think they need) to be able to add that stuff - Mac users don't.

Typically. Of course, my company uses some nasty nonstandard 802.11b with encryption or sumptin in the hardware. So, you have to use their custom wireless card in the PC slot. There's a use. Of course, there's no OS X drivers or IT support. Alas, not Mac users don't, just Mac users can't.

I doubt around here, guys would talk of themselves as being huge wankers.

I'm guessing he isn't calling himself a wanker, just claiming his wanker is huge.

[Eug]

Enough about my wanker! It was just an amusing name at the time. I'm beginning to regret it...

Not true. DVI is the only way to connect a PowerBook to an Apple display w/o expensive third-party hardware.

I love DVI (on my TiBook), but to connect it to an Apple Display requires an Apple DVI->ADC converter. Definitely not cheap. Most 3rd party higher-end TFTs comes with both VGA and DVI inputs (and no ADC).

DVI carried the analog signal, so it should be easy enough to do a VGA dongle. I would rather have DVI/VGA over VGA/s-video.

Yes, the way it works with the upper end PowerBooks is that the DVI port is DVI-I, and a dongle converts it to VGA. It is an added expense though, since then you have to provide the dongle. (Apple would have a lot of irritated customers if they sold a machine with no DVI->VGA dongle. It's cheaper just to make the port VGA and be done with... as much as I don't like that.)

7457-RM we will be probably as close to heaven as possible

I'm starting to think I'll just wait until 2005 and get a G5-based laptop.

The screen quality on the 12" PowerBook seems really good to me. Nice colors and nice and sharp resolution. I believe that really impresses PC people. Especially when you compare it to smaller el-cheapo no-name books.

I think screens have improved across the board. The PC laptops my colleagues are getting have pretty nice screens too. The 12" iBook/PB's screen is on par with them or at best slightly better than average. The 15" and 17" screens blow them away however.

[beachmark]

Why does not everyone just buy a computer now. Why wait? By the way: as soon as a new model is being released people will start asking after an even faster one again.

I thought of waiting too but after a long talk with someone at Apple International Sales in Cupertino she convinced me of acting now. This woman told me that you need to set a goal once and then work with it for 36-48 months. When you look at your computer over such a time period it does not make any difference if you buy it today. In a year's time even the follow up model will be perceived as slow (although for 90 per cent of the Apple population even a one year old Powerbook would have been fast enough).

So, please stop the predicting buy a computer when you need one and once an upgrade is being presented take it for granted when you just bought another one: in three years from now it is still a good one.

[neutrino23]

Originally posted by Simon:

But it's flexibility that is mainly only needed by PC users. We already have internal 802.11b/g cards, we already have USB andFireWire, we already have fast Ethernet, etc. We have all those goodies internally already. Some PC users need (or think they need) to be able to add that stuff - Mac users don't.

I don't know. The way it is now, everybody is baffled about the 12" being so small and still having all the goodies. If it is pushed to 13" I doubt it would retain the very small feel it has. But of course that's very subjective. The 14" iBook comes to my mind which I find is terribly bulky and ugly while offering not more - it's still just an inexpensive iBook.

I understand th 106dpi problem. 1024x768 on 12" is the max. But, at the same time it is very competitive when you look at PC notebooks. Dell loves to advertise the 1600x1200 on their 15" books and I find that a ridiculously high resolution. A co-worker has one of those. The poor sucker didn't get Linux put on it by our lab's IT guys, so he used the default XP for a while. In Word he was looking at pages with 200% magnification. Great.

The screen quality on the 12" PowerBook seems really good to me. Nice colors and nice and sharp resolution. I believe that really impresses PC people. Especially when you compare it to smaller el-cheapo no-name books.

RE: PC card slots
It is true that Apple's come with most of the accessories that wintels put in the PC card slot. However, there are a few others which are not stadnard. In Japan and some parts of the US you can get wireless modems that give you internet connectivity pretty much anywhere. You could get a PC card slot with a FW interface but it is awkward for laptops.

The discussion I heard about a 13" PB was that Apple could put a 13" screen in the current case without increasing the size.

I agree about the dpi. 105 or 110 is about as dense as we should go unless the OS becomes dpi independent.

[urrl5201]

People still look forward to each tuesday but the revisions don't come. More and more posters are giving up and buying present configurations.

And yes, I feel for Eug Wanker. I had a Korean friend who only after 2 months in the US gave his name to a cop giving him a ticket and the cop yanked him out of the car, made him eat pavement and cuffed him, just for giving the cop his name, Yu Phok. The judge tried to pronounce his name, calling him "yoo Pok?" and when he corrected the judge, shouting "No No!!! Yu Phok! Yu Phok!" he got the book thrown at him literally. He never changed his name because he was so proud of its heritage. I did convince him to modify it, but realized too late after he was beaten up by a bunch of US Customs agents and almost anyone else he came in contact with that he had merely switched his name around from Yu Phok to Phok Yu. Very sad. In fact he is in the hospital right now after an unexpected extended stay; from being beaten up by the medical staff.

[neutrino23]

Originally posted by beachmark:
Why does not everyone just buy a computer now. Why wait? By the way: as soon as a new model is being released people will start asking after an even faster one again.

I thought of waiting too but after a long talk with someone at Apple International Sales in Cupertino she convinced me of acting now. This woman told me that you need to set a goal once and then work with it for 36-48 months. When you look at your computer over such a time period it does not make any difference if you buy it today. In a year's time even the follow up model will be perceived as slow (although for 90 per cent of the Apple population even a one year old Powerbook would have been fast enough).

So, please stop the predicting buy a computer when you need one and once an upgrade is being presented take it for granted when you just bought another one: in three years from now it is still a good one.

I am one of those waiting for the next 15" Al book to come out. It is not any one feature I am concerned about as much as the total package. I buy a new PB about once every two years. This one will last two years or more.

The two biggest features I am holding out for are Airport Extreme and FW800. In addition I suspect this will have a much nicer LCD. One reason to get this new PB is to use it for presentations. Beyond that the backlit keyboard, better GPU, Al case, slight speed bump are all nice additions. As a package these features are attractive.

[Simon]

Originally posted by Eug:
Enough about my wanker! It was just an amusing name at the time. I'm beginning to regret it...

Well, I hope so. Didn't the forums.macnn.com subscription agreement say something about sexual... OK, I'll shut up.

I love DVI (on my TiBook), but to connect it to an Apple Display requires an Apple DVI->ADC converter. Definitely not cheap. Most 3rd party higher-end TFTs comes with both VGA and DVI inputs (and no ADC).

But you do agree that a DVI-ADC converter is much cheaper than a VGA-ADC converter. Of course none of these solutions are very nice. Apple should just give their screens VGA, DVI and ADC. VGA for the old computers, DVI for the PowerBooks and ADC for the PowerMacs. That would make everybody happy.

Of course the DVI-VGA dongle on a notebook isn't a perfect solution. But at least DVI respectively DVI-I gives you all the flexibility, whereas VGA doesn't. In the Mac world VGA should be outdated already. DVI-I is backward-compatible.

BTW, the DVI-VGA dongle costs Apple nothing. Since DVI-I has the VGA signal in hardware it's just an adapter, but it doesn't have any "intelligence". This is not the case with VGA-ADC converters, since they need to process the analog data and convert it into the digital video stream. You can see it very well when you compare the size of the converters. DVI-VGA is just a dongle. VGA-ADC is a box with a little board, chips, etc. DVI-ADC is a box as well, since it needs power and USB too.

I'm starting to think I'll just wait until 2005 and get a G5-based laptop.

I understand you very well. I think the 12" PowerBook is a fine machine and actually I should have got it when it came out. L3, DVI and GPU are not deal-stoppers. But, after waiting five months I figured I might as well wait for the next revision. Now, I'm still waiting and starting to think it was stupid, but I'd kick myself for getting a rev a now and watching rev b come in a month.

Darn, I'm a wuss.

[Fyre4ce]

Originally posted by ae86_16v:
Okay, the second numbers are Bus Speeds, what are the first? Or are you just multiplying it by a arbitrary number?

Sorry, I just want to know.

What my collegue is trying to say is this:

The ratio between the bus speed and the CPU speed must be either a whole number (like 4) or a "half number" like 6.5.

So, if you have a 100 MHz bus, your possible processor speeds would be 100 MHz, 150 MHz, 200 MHz, 250 MHz... and so on.

It wouldn't work if you had a 100 MHz bus and a 277 MHz CPU because the ratio between the two is some really nasty irrational number, and two two won't be sync'ed up.

See, the bus "speed" is more than just how much information. The bus sends information in and out of the CPU in little bursts, and the bursts are timed. A 100 MHz bus means that it sends 100 million bursts per second. How big the bursts are is also important. A 100 MHz 128-bit bus is twice as fast as a 100 MHz 64-bit bus.

The "MHz" of the CPU tells you how many computing cycles it runs per second (ie. a 500 MHz CPU runs 500 million cycles per second). Just as is the case with the bus, it matters how much gets done each cycle. That's why a 2 GHz G5 can beat a 3 GHz Pentium 3 at most things - the G5 runs fewer cycles but gets a lot more done per cycle, so the net is it's faster.

It should make sense to you now that the bus speed and the CPU speed should be matched up. Which is why the ratio between the two needs to he a whole or half number.

Also worth noting, the BIGGER the number is, the LESS efficiently the CPU operates. If the number is, say, 10, that means the CPU runs 10 cycles for every pulse of information it gets. If it runs out of things to do before the next pulse gets to it, it sits idle. That's why there's a diminishing return in CPU speed - ie. a 1.5 GHz G4 in the PowerBook wouldn't be nearly 50% faster than a 1 GHz, because most of those 500 extra MHz would be wasted sitting idle waiting for information from the bus. Look at the ratio in the new G5's - it's a nice low number (2) which means the CPU will be fed a steady stream of information. Does that make sense?

Phew, that was longer than I originally expected, but I guess I got carried away. Did

[Eug]

See seanyepez's thread about the 17".

What I learned is that the updated power consumption spec for the new G4 7457 is now 8.3 Watts at 1 GHz, which is just over HALF the power consumption of what they were quoting last year for the same CPU and speed.

If the numbers are to be believed, this makes a dual G4 1 GHz laptop an actual possibility at only 16.6 Watts. (For reference, the 1 GHz G4 7455 is supposed to be 15 Watts typical.) A dual G4 PowerBook would have been VERY undesirable with the previous 7455 chips. Interesting, in previous posts I had said that the time Apple goes dual in a laptop, that's the time we should be worried about the state of Apple, unless there is a radical change in the CPU. I think an 8.3 Watt G4 CPU at 1 GHz is pretty radical.

If Motorola is truly able to build and sell 1 GHz G4 8.3 Watt CPUs, that would be VERY impressive, and would potentially benefit both Apple laptop users and of course the embedded market. OTOH, a single 1.3 GHz laptop (12 Watts?) would still be more desirable in many ways, including the fact that it would use less power than a dual 1 GHz, and it would take up less space. Thus, I continue to predict a 1.25-1.33 GHz 17" PowerBook, but with longer battery life than I might have expected. I haven't seen any new specs on a new 1.3 GHz 7457 though, just the 1 GHz. Curious...

[ae86_16v]

Fyre4ce: Thanks . Great explaination.

[Eug]

Originally posted by Eug:
If the numbers are to be believed, this makes a dual G4 1 GHz laptop an actual possibility at only 16.6 Watts. (For reference, the 1 GHz G4 7455 is supposed to be 15 Watts typical.) A dual G4 PowerBook would have been VERY undesirable with the previous 7455 chips. Interesting, in previous posts I had said that the time Apple goes dual in a laptop, that's the time we should be worried about the state of Apple, unless there is a radical change in the CPU. I think an 8.3 Watt G4 CPU at 1 GHz is pretty radical.

If Motorola is truly able to build and sell 1 GHz G4 8.3 Watt CPUs, that would be VERY impressive, and would potentially benefit both Apple laptop users and of course the embedded market. OTOH, a single 1.3 GHz laptop (12 Watts?) would still be more desirable in many ways, including the fact that it would use less power than a dual 1 GHz

Hmmm... This Synergy Microsystems 7457 shipping announcement from May has the 7457 1 GHz < 10 W and 1.3 GHz < 15 W, whatever that means.

[Group51]

Originally posted by Eug:
Yes, the way it works with the upper end PowerBooks is that the DVI port is DVI-I, and a dongle converts it to VGA. It is an added expense though, since then you have to provide the dongle. (Apple would have a lot of irritated customers if they sold a machine with no DVI->VGA dongle. It's cheaper just to make the port VGA and be done with... as much as I don't like that.)

PB12 does not have a VGA port, it has a video-out proprietary slot. Apple already supplies a dongle with a VGA port.

The problem I suspect is that to fit a DVI port, they would have to redesign the motherboard and the case.

They should have done that the first time around.

[Simon]

Originally posted by Group51:
The problem I suspect is that to fit a DVI port, they would have to redesign the motherboard and the case.

They should have done that the first time around.

Yep. Do it right the first time.

But honestly, I highly doubt that it was a size issue. Look at DVI-I and Apple's Video-Out. The difference in width is about three to four mm and in height it's maybe one or two mm. That doesn't sound like a major technical limitation. If you open a 12" PowerBook you will see that it has crammed interiors, but you will also see that you could still shave a few mm here and there.

No, I think it was marketing. And if not, then it was time/effort concerns, i.e. take as much as possible from what the existing iBook had. If they had to rush it, they would have probably taken more form the iBook. But, I recall having read that the 12" was done and waiting for the 17" to get finalized. So it hardly was missing time. Therefore I guess it's nothing else, but simple marketing. Bad marketing btw (as pointed out earlier in this thread) becuase it makes Apple earn less rather than more. Good one Phil.

[skateray]

bumb

[Eug]

Motorola has finally released info on the 7455 G4 up to 1.4 GHz. Some interesting info (compilation of old and new documents):

Code:
Chip     Speed         Typical power      Max power      Comment
7455     1.0 GHz       15 Watts           22 Watts       Older document
7455     1.0 GHz       30 Watts           40 Watts       Newer document
7457     1.0 GHz       15.8 Watts                        Older document
7457     1.0 GHz       8.3 Watts          11.2 Watts     Newer document
7457     1.3 GHz       18.7 Watts                        Older document
7455     1.33 GHz      30 Watts           40 Watts
7455     1.4 GHz       34 Watts           45 Watts

[crispinwilliams]

Hello Eug
The older document that you refer to appears to be MPC7457EC - which was last updated 7/24/2003. What document has these newer numbers of 8.3 W at 1 GHz?.. the only reference to these low numbers appears to be some presentation of someone at Motorola - and it was unclear to me whether these were wishful thinking or hard numbers...
indeed if the power consumption is in reality 8.3 W at 1 GHz... this would open up the possibility of a dual cpu powerbook.. and this update to the powerbook line that everyone awaits could be a big step forward. Personally I am pessimistic about the ability of motorola to make a the 7457 run at 1 MHz with 8.3 W - but I would happy to be proved wrong
Crispin

[Eug]

Originally posted by crispinwilliams:
The older document that you refer to appears to be MPC7457EC - which was last updated 7/24/2003. What document has these newer numbers of 8.3 W at 1 GHz?.. the only reference to these low numbers appears to be some presentation of someone at Motorola - and it was unclear to me whether these were wishful thinking or hard numbers...
indeed if the power consumption is in reality 8.3 W at 1 GHz... this would open up the possibility of a dual cpu powerbook.. and this update to the powerbook line that everyone awaits could be a big step forward. Personally I am pessimistic about the ability of motorola to make a the 7457 run at 1 MHz with 8.3 W - but I would happy to be proved wrong

Yeah, I don't fully understand what's with their numbers either, but see the product blurb and the updated datasheet PDF:

Building on Motorola's continued innovation and performance leadership in the high-performance host processor market, the MPC7457 achieves two major milestones in the embedded world: It delivers 1.3 GHz of performance--making it Motorola's fastest PowerPC� processor available for embedded applications. It also dissipates less than 10W while running at 1 GHz--a critical threshold for many power-sensitive embedded designs.

The PDF specifically states 8.3 Watts typical and 11.5 Watts maximum at 1 GHz. (I had mistakenly posted 11.2 Watts earlier, but close enough. ) One very important point however is that this chip can run at 1.1 V, which is much lower than they had for the other spec PDF. I think what's going on here is that they have a lower power variant of the chip, called the 7457RX1000NB. Probably the document you're talking about is the usual version of the chip, which runs at higher voltage and higher power. There doesn't seem to be a 1.3 GHz 7457RX1000NB, but the small possibility exists that a PowerBook could run TWO 7457RX1000NB chips for a dual 1.0 GHz.

[crispinwilliams]

Dear Eug
I applaude your ability to decode the data sheets from Motorola.. and indeed you are right - they quote a processor with 1.1 V core voltage and 8.3 W power...

I hope that this means a dual 1 GHz cpu powerbook in the near future..

but does this mean that if they announce a speed bump to 1.3 GHz - Apple will be using the higher power 7457 processor?
crispin

[The Placid Casual]

Originally posted by Eug:
Yeah, I don't fully understand what's with their numbers either, but see the product blurb and the updated datasheet PDF:

Building on Motorola's continued innovation and performance leadership in the high-performance host processor market, the MPC7457 achieves two major milestones in the embedded world: It delivers 1.3 GHz of performance--making it Motorola's fastest PowerPC� processor available for embedded applications. It also dissipates less than 10W while running at 1 GHz--a critical threshold for many power-sensitive embedded designs.

The PDF specifically states 8.3 Watts typical and 11.5 Watts maximum at 1 GHz. (I had mistakenly posted 11.2 Watts earlier, but close enough. ) One very important point however is that this chip can run at 1.1 V, which is much lower than they had for the other spec PDF. I think what's going on here is that they have a lower power variant of the chip, called the 7457RX1000NB. Probably the document you're talking about is the usual version of the chip, which runs at higher voltage and higher power. There doesn't seem to be a 1.3 GHz 7457RX1000NB, but the small possibility exists that a PowerBook could run TWO 7457RX1000NB chips for a dual 1.0 GHz.

Yep, great post as ever Eug!

I really wish we had custom titles, as you would have my vote as the MacNN resident 'CPU Discussions and Benchmarks Voice Of Reason'!

[crispinwilliams]

Another interesting item from these data sheets is that the 7457 is quoted as having a max system clock of 167 MHz.. while the 7457RX1000NB has a max system clock of 133 MHz... I guess that this is the speed of the memory that you can use with these cpu's? Anyway with this new info - can you (Eug) make new predictions of what you might expect when the powerbook line gets updated.. note also the 7457 needs 18.7 W at 1.3 GHz assuming that 7457RX1000NB cannot be pushed to 1.3 GHz

[Zmai]

New Powerbook models.

I don't know about model specifics (ram, speed, etc.)

Just that they are coming in 3 weeks. With G4's in them.

.z

[The Placid Casual]

Originally posted by Zmai:
New Powerbook models.

I don't know about model specifics (ram, speed, etc.)

Just that they are coming in 3 weeks. With G4's in them.

.z

While I would never encourage anyone to spill their source... Any chance you can tell us the source?

[Naz]

I'm really hurting for a PB right now...

I just gottah have one

[Eug]

Originally posted by crispinwilliams:
Another interesting item from these data sheets is that the 7457 is quoted as having a max system clock of 167 MHz.. while the 7457RX1000NB has a max system clock of 133 MHz... I guess that this is the speed of the memory that you can use with these cpu's? Anyway with this new info - can you (Eug) make new predictions of what you might expect when the powerbook line gets updated.. note also the 7457 needs 18.7 W at 1.3 GHz assuming that 7457RX1000NB cannot be pushed to 1.3 GHz

I dunno, (with no inside info) I'm still predicting the 7457 1.25-1.33 GHz single, based on the standard chip. It was seanyepez who said it'd be a dual. I'm just saying his prediction is not a crazy one based on the info available.

It's too bad that chip only supports 133 MHz, if true. Dunno why, considering 1 GHz is a multiple of 167 MHz.

[David Hagan]

Originally posted by Zmai:
New Powerbook models.

I don't know about model specifics (ram, speed, etc.)

Just that they are coming in 3 weeks. With G4's in them.

.z

The week of Aug. 11th or the week of Aug. 18th?

[clf8]

So, the stoopud question of the minute:
If Powerbooks came out next week, would you get the free upgrade to Panther?

Secondly, and more stoopud, anyone waiting for Panther to get their new pbook, so they don't have to reinstall the OS? I know I will be doing a clean Panther install.

[Eug]

Originally posted by clf8:
So, the stoopud question of the minute:
If Powerbooks came out next week, would you get the free upgrade to Panther?

Secondly, and more stoopud, anyone waiting for Panther to get their new pbook, so they don't have to reinstall the OS? I know I will be doing a clean Panther install.

I doubt it. I didn't get free upgrades to iDVD 3, and I got my TiBook just before it came out (but also before it was announced).

[kennedy]

How long from new PB announce to new PB ship?
If the new PB line is announced 8/5, when would the machines be shipping?

I need a PB soon, but the current mix of features makes it impossible for me to be happy with any one of them... I'm sure I want the new ones, but I'm not sure I can wait that long.

[GENERAL_SMILEY]

I think the PCMIA card is mainly for GSM cards (cell phone).

[Simon]

Originally posted by GENERAL_SMILEY:
I think the PCMIA card is mainly for GSM cards (cell phone).

Yep. That seems to be the most useful gadget to put in there IMHO as well.

That leads me to the question: Why the hell doesn't Apple just fit a GSM card slot into these books. The antennas for APX and BT are already in there. I suppose GSM could use such an antenna scheme as well. Maybe even in parasitic operation. Now a GSM slot and a GSM chip (to bridge between card and antenna) together are a lot smaller than a PCMCIA slot. Plus, it's much nicer to use internal antennas than the damn little rubber knob antenna sticking out of your PCMCIA slot. And, next to that, Apple could advertise the Book to be the most connective ever right out of the box. Every possible connection and that on every spot on earth. Cool.

[Eug]

Why the hell doesn't Apple just fit a GSM card slot into these books.

The whole point of PCMCIA is flexibility, not just to be able to use GSM data. PCMCIA adds the potential of features for a relatively wide range of people. GSM adds a single feature for a much smaller group of people, for higher cost.

Anyways, it's now the first Tuesday of August and still no new PowerBook. I've been thinking since last month that an August release would be about the right time, but now I'm wondering if August is gonna even be possible. September? October with Panther?

If I were in the market for a new laptop (and still had an old laptop I could use in the interim), I'd still wait though, even if it meant waiting until Hallowe'en.

[hyteckit]

Dude, new powerbooks on September 9. Will be shown during Seybold.

[skateray]

Originally posted by hyteckit:
Dude, new powerbooks on September 9. Will be shown during Seybold.

As long as it is by Sept. 27 so i can get 200 bucks off an iPod and 100 off a printer I will be happy, even though I won't have it by the time I start school.... which is kinda crappy but something I can live with for the many improvements that will be made to the 15".