[J.B.]

MOSR has a new rumor report up that seems feasible to me. The basics: mid-2002 ibook gets a bump to 13.3" or 13.7", whichever they can fit in the current enclosure, but remains at 1024x768 while the TiBook moves to 16"/1600xsomething resolution or thereabouts. This would provide a nice, reasonable update to the iBook while keeping plenty of distinction in the TiBook line. Now the prediction of G4s in the iBook in mid-02 seems a bit of a stretch to me.

A 1-1.5" screen size bump would make the iBook a true iMac/desktop alternative. Come to think of it, how would they sell any iMacs at all with the price points as close as they are? I guess continuing to hobble the graphics and/or sticking with G3s in the iBook would save some iMac sales. Or maybe a bigger display in the iMacs?

Whether fruitful or not, speculation sure is a lot of fun!! Any thoughts??

[tobster]

A 16" laptop... omg... not useful i say...

better resolution on the ti screen... niiiiice....

13.7 inch ibook.... bull...

g4 ibook mid summer 02... bulll


my 2 kr�nur...

tobs

Why would they want to increase the size of the screen? It's fine the way it is. 1024*768 on this 12,1" with osX running, just great! The iBook sells very good, I can't imagine apple replacing the screen after one year. This would be a waste of development-resources. A bigger screen will come with a totally new iBook, but we'll be talking 2004.

[kcmac]

Seems a bit of a reach to get a 13.3 or bigger screen in the same enclosure. That would go clear to edge where the plastic cover starts looks like to me. Don't they also put the antenna in there?

I love the screen size. I just don't see what makes bigger better on the iBook. I think it is as close to perfection as Apple has achieved from a consumer standpoint just on the form factor alone. The sales don't lie and it is the best priced Apple product on the market.

Just keep making them faster and work on the track pad a little bit more.

[OldManMac]

MOSR is a "rumor" site, nothing more, and it's usually very inaccurate!

[Workers Comp Wampa]

I "predict" that computers will get faster and better at each new release.

Should I start my own rumors site?

[V Roller]

That would be terribly disappointing. The screen size is excellent the way it is. I want to see better cpu/cache performance. I also want to see CD-RW option and DVD option switch places on the price hierarchy.

[satchmo]

You must admit though a slightly larger screen would be nice.
Jumping to 13.3 inches I think would make a nice transition without encroaching on Ti territory.

Keeping it at the same res wouldn't harm the look too much, as I find the current res too high for the size. But everyone has his/her opinions on this.
Maybe it's the current 12.1 form factor on the low end and a 13.3 on the high end.

[Eug]

I would like having a 13" 1024x768 screen. That would be perfect IMO. I would also prefer if my iBook could display resolutions higher than 1024x768 for external monitors. 1024x768 on a 19" is a bit too small.

And I still don't understand why the G4 Ti costs so much.

[V Roller]

Originally posted by satchmo:
<STRONG>You must admit though a slightly larger screen would be nice.
Jumping to 13.3 inches I think would make a nice transition without encroaching on Ti territory.</STRONG>

The Ti is nacho el grande, when all I need is a sandwich.

[Immortal K-Mart Employee]

Originally posted by Eug:
<STRONG>
And I still don't understand why the G4 Ti costs so much.</STRONG>

Because the widescreen high quality LCD screen is not standard in the laptop world. Not to mention after all of the fancy features that the TiBook has is is only an inch thick which is less then the iBook.

[Eug]

Originally posted by Immortal K-Mart Employee:
<STRONG>

Because the widescreen high quality LCD screen is not standard in the laptop world. Not to mention after all of the fancy features that the TiBook has is is only an inch thick which is less then the iBook.</STRONG>

You're right of course, except that the screen on the TiBook isn't very impressive actually. The screens found on many much cheaper PC laptops are MUCH nicer, although not widescreen. The 1400x1050 and 1600x1200 4:3 screens found on Dells for instance blow away the TiBook's screen by a long shot. Just imagine an iBook's screen but much bigger. (Some of my colleagues have it.) OTOH, the form factor of the TiBook is nice, and the pricing is in line with the PC laptops of similar size.

Anyways, my ideal laptop would be a G4 with 13" screen with one PCMCIA slot, a Radeon, and a combo drive (unavailable on the TiBooks).

[Vader's Robotic Stump]

Originally posted by Eug:
<STRONG>
Anyways, my ideal laptop would be a G4 with 13" screen with one PCMCIA slot, a Radeon, and a combo drive (unavailable on the TiBooks).</STRONG>

This is why...

15.2 Widescreen
Slot loading
Fastest laptop on the planet
PCMCIA
Firewire
USB
Ethernet
s-video
infrared
5 pounds
Radon
Airport
Gigabit Ethernet
1 inch thick

Find me a PC with those specs and you can ask again why it costs so much. Find something halfway close and we can argue OSX vs. Windows.

Why are Sony laptops $4700 when they don't even touch the iBook?

What do you need PCMCIA for in the iBook? Were would there be room for it. Perhaps you should have bought the Ti.

[rampant]

Originally posted by Vader's Robotic Stump:
<STRONG>

This is why...

15.2 Widescreen
Slot loading
Fastest laptop on the planet
PCMCIA
Firewire
USB
Ethernet
s-video
infrared
5 pounds
Radon
Airport
Gigabit Ethernet
1 inch thick

Find me a PC with those specs and you can ask again why it costs so much. Find something halfway close and we can argue OSX vs. Windows.

Why are Sony laptops $4700 when they don't even touch the iBook?

What do you need PCMCIA for in the iBook? Were would there be room for it. Perhaps you should have bought the Ti.</STRONG>

Ok. I'm as much as a mac user as the next... mac user, but I can't let ig'nance like this continue.


lets see...


�15.2 Widescreen�Many other laptops have screens of that size, and they also have much higher resolutions. The Compaq 2700 and the Dell 8100 have 1200x1600 resolution 15" screens
�Slot loading
�Fastest laptop on the planet� The Titanium is nowhere near the fastest laptop on the planet. Maybe at photoshop, but that's it. There are laptops out there that run circles around it in games and in other programs.
�PCMCIA�A standard which is on almost ever PC laptop
�Firewire�Also a standard which is on almost all new PC laptops
�USB�Also on every new PC
�Ethernet�ditto
�s-video�ditto
�infrared�ditto (although very old, should be gotten rid of)
�5 pounds�done, although you should know that the Titanium is 5.3lbs
�Radon�I assume you mean Radeon, and all decent laptops have �either that or a Geforce2Go
�Airport�any PC with PCMCIA slots is wireless ready.
�Gigabit Ethernet�many PC's have that
�1 inch thick�Done

"Find me a PC with those specs and you can ask again why it costs so much. Find something halfway close and we can argue OSX vs. Windows."

You ask to find a PC with those specs for the same price, but there plain isn't any. It's unique in that it's 1inch thick. I could, however, find you a PC laptop at much less the price at a higher speed with the same features but a little thicker. I could go and ask you to find a mac laptop that has a 14.3 inch screen at 1600x1200 resolution with a radeon card, firewire, a floppy drive, and a CD drive, IR ports, 2 PC card slots, is 1.3 inches thick, weighs 5.1lbs, and costs $1,148, and of course you couldn't find one because something with all those specific features is unique. Your "find me a PC that..." challenge is null.

"Why are Sony laptops $4700 when they don't even touch the iBook?"

The most expensive Sony laptop starts at $1700 online, and it completely obliterates the ibook in ever way. Don't kid yourself, Macs are good for some things, but they aren't infallable.

[Vader's Robotic Stump]

Why don't you actually show us one then?

[rampant]

http://athome.compaq.com/default.asp...&page=families

the 1700 on that page.

I'm getting one with:

1Ghz P-IIIM
512k L2 cache
133mhz bus
128 ram (buying another 128 after I get it for $20)
15 Gb HD
14.3 inch TFT display at either 1024 x 768 native or 1200x1600
ATI Radeon mobility with DDR ram
Windows XP
2 years tech support and service

and for ports:
10/100mbps ethernet
s-video/tv out
firewire
hot-swapable drives
IR port
2 USB ports
PS/2 ports
2 type-2 PC card slots
and a bunch of other standard stuff.

It's 5.1 lbs and 1.3 inches thin.

It costs me $1148 including shipping and handling.

If that isn't the type you want me to show you, you'll have to be more specific than just "show me one".

[ 11-26-2001: Message edited by: rampant ]

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Originally posted by rampant:
<STRONG>
If that isn't the type you want me to show you, you'll have to be more specific than just "show me one".</STRONG>

Show me one that compares to the TiBook. That Compaq has a 2 inch smaller screen and is not widescreen. You realize this is what brings the cost of the Ti up.

Show me a PC laptop with the same (or very close) specs as the Ti for less.

Is that clear?

[Eug]

Originally posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker:
<STRONG>

Show me one that compares to the TiBook. That Compaq has a 2 inch smaller screen and is not widescreen. You realize this is what brings the cost of the Ti up.

Show me a PC laptop with the same (or very close) specs as the Ti for less.

Is that clear?</STRONG>

I'm not going to argue since I like my iBook, but you really should take a close look at what's out there these days for TFT screens. The on TiBook isn't even as nice as the one on the iBook, although bigger, and it's way below what's out there in PC land. I'd take a 1400x1050 14" LCD over the widescreen 15"+ screen of the TiBook any day. Much more effective screen real estate. That said, the overall specs of the TiBook are pretty nice.

[rampant]

Originally posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker:
<STRONG>

Show me one that compares to the TiBook. That Compaq has a 2 inch smaller screen and is not widescreen. You realize this is what brings the cost of the Ti up.

Show me a PC laptop with the same (or very close) specs as the Ti for less.

Is that clear?</STRONG>

I told you that the Ti is unique in that it's 1 inch thin and has a wierd aspect ration, and that that there are no others just like it, so that doesn't make much sense. I can show you a laptop with much better resolution and performance in every way for less (Dell 8100, Compaq Presario 2700) but they aren't 1 inch thin.

[Vader's Robotic Stump]

Originally posted by rampant:
<STRONG>


I told you that the Ti is unique in that it's 1 inch thin and has a wierd aspect ration, and that that there are no others just like it, so that doesn't make much sense. I can show you a laptop with much better resolution and performance in every way for less (Dell 8100, Compaq Presario 2700) but they aren't 1 inch thin.</STRONG>

So you have no point then.

[rampant]

I could go and ask you to find a mac laptop that has a 14.3 inch screen at 1600x1200 resolution with a radeon card, firewire, a floppy drive, and a CD drive, IR ports, 2 PC card slots, is 1.3 inches thick, weighs 5.1lbs, and costs $1,148, and of course you couldn't find one because something with all those specific features is unique. Your "find me a PC that..." challenge is null.

so your completely wrong unless you can find me another computer with those features at the same price. Go on, try it. Lets put another in for good measure:

[Vader's Robotic Stump]

Originally posted by Eug:
<STRONG>
I'm not going to argue since I like my iBook, but you really should take a close look at what's out there these days for TFT screens. The on TiBook isn't even as nice as the one on the iBook, although bigger, and it's way below what's out there in PC land. I'd take a 1400x1050 14" LCD over the widescreen 15"+ screen of the TiBook any day. Much more effective screen real estate. That said, the overall specs of the TiBook are pretty nice.</STRONG>

I don't need to take a close look. I know there is no PC out there with a 15.2 widescreen and awesome specs for the same price. Yes YOU might take a 14" screen rather then a widescreen and that is why you have an iBook and use it for surfing and easy stuff.

Graphic a especially Video designers would take a 15" widescreen over anything else as horizontal space is very precious for graphic a video apps. That is who the Ti is targeted towards. Not you.

Yes the screen is not as good as the iBook as the DPI is lower because it has a much bigger diagonal width. Are we asking to much when in all probibility a better DPI widescreen would cost even more or doesn�t even exist?

Find me a 15.2� WIDESCREEN PC laptop with a better screen please, otherwise their is no point in comparing the iBook vs the totally different TiBook screen.

[rampant]

http://gateway.com/home/prod/hm_s955...odDetail.shtml

15.7 inch screen. It doesn't matter if it's widescreen or not if it's bigger and crisper anyway. Pretend you can't see the top half /

[Eug]

Originally posted by Vader's Robotic Stump:
<STRONG>

I don't need to take a close look. I know there is no PC out there with a 15.2 widescreen and awesome specs for the same price. Yes YOU might take a 14" screen rather then a widescreen and that is why you have an iBook and use it for surfing and easy stuff.

Graphic a especially Video designers would take a 15" widescreen over anything else as horizontal space is very precious for graphic a video apps. That is who the Ti is targeted towards. Not you.

Yes the screen is not as good as the iBook as the DPI is lower because it has a much bigger diagonal width. Are we asking to much when in all probibility a better DPI widescreen would cost even more or doesn�t even exist?

Find me a 15.2� WIDESCREEN PC laptop with a better screen please, otherwise their is no point in comparing the iBook vs the totally different TiBook screen.</STRONG>

The resolution of the TiBook is only 1152x768, which means the hoizontal resolution is only a marginal improvement over the iBook and vertical resolution is exactly the same. High DPI TFTs however are actually quite common. Even though the horizontal width of many 15" PC TFT screens is slightly less than than the TiBook, its effective screen horizontal screen real estate is MUCH more at 1600. 1600/1152 = 1.4X more horizontally, and 1200/768 = 1.6X more vertically. Overall, a higher end 15" PC TFT has 2.2X the number of pixels, or over twice the real desktop space than an TiBook. I only said 1400x1050 14" for me, because that's what I'd want, but that's definitely not what PCs are limited to.

[Vader's Robotic Stump]

Originally posted by rampant:
<STRONG>
15.7 inch screen. It doesn't matter if it's widescreen or not if it's bigger and crisper anyway. Pretend you can't see the top half /</STRONG>

You obviously have no clue as to what you are talking about.

[rampant]

well sh�t vader, your increadible argument has me speechless, I'm crushed by your intellect!

In what way could a 15.2 inch screen with a horizontally stretched screen and only slightly better than 1024 x 768 resolution be better than a 15.7 inch screen at 1600 x 1200? THERE IS NO WAY IT IS BETTER. Stop trying to fool yourself and actually try posting something instead of these "that's wrong just cuz" sh�t answers and half witted insults.

[ 11-27-2001: Message edited by: rampant ]

[Sam I Am]

I'm sorry but just to make a point... How does flaming each other discuss the new feature set of the iBook? (that is what the thread is about, right? RIGHT?)

[x user]

Yikes, that PC laptop looks nice. IF IT WASN"T 1.65 INCHES THICK... Comon guys. Your fighting like a bunch of high-school students... Apple got the the laptop market in the refrigerator, the door is closed the lights are out the eggs are coolin, the butters gettin hard, and the JELLO's JIGGLLLIN.....

Serious, most people that own a laptop aren't concerned in raw specs as much as the cool factor, and the cool factor of Apples laptops are #1

I should know

[rampant]

<font color = blue> =( </font>

[SMacSteve]

I thought sometime ago that Apple could increase the size of the iBook's screen to 13 without changing the current chassis. I'd like to see it!

[Vader's Robotic Stump]

Originally posted by rampant:
<STRONG>well sh�t vader, your increadible argument has me speechless, I'm crushed by your intellect! Stop trying to fool yourself and actually try posting something instead of these "that's wrong just cuz" sh�t answers and half witted insults.

[ 11-27-2001: Message edited by: rampant ]</STRONG>

This is exactly why I stopped discussing this with you. You are one of those �The specs are the almost the same on a PC Laptop and that is all that matters�.

Yawn.

[rampant]

Originally posted by Vader's Robotic Stump:
<STRONG>

This is exactly why I stopped discussing this with you. You are one of those �The specs are the almost the same on a PC Laptop and that is all that matters�.

Yawn.</STRONG>

Silly me, I expected a logical argument.

[Mastrap]

Originally posted by rampant:
<STRONG>


�infrared�ditto (although very old, should be gotten rid of)
</STRONG>

Don't really want to get in volved in a private bunfight here but I disagree with you about the above. Infrared is great for people who use their Macs on the road. Connectivity to most Nokia phones is a breeze and with GPRS soon being available it is becoming even more usable. I understand that the US are behing on wireless connectivity - I know, I know you're ahead in broadband - but in Europe infrared is a godsend. It's the only thing I miss in my iBook. Oh, and analogue sound in.