[Fyre4ce]

Pismo is a 100 MHz bus, not 66. The previous machines, Lombards, had the 66. The Pismo is still a good machine.

[k2man]

The Pismo is indeed a great machine. Next to my original Mac II (1987: first Mac with color, first with expansion slots, first with a standalone monitor, etc.), this is the best all-round computer I've ever owned.

But...check out the latest edition of MacOSRumors. I know they're not the most reliable of sources, but their latest post regarding the next Ti sounds plausible:

867 MHz G4
Radeon 7500 with 32 megs
higher res screen
longer battery

They certainly have enough time to make all that happen, and that's exactly what I'm looking for....

[skyman]

Originally posted by k2man:
<STRONG>The Pismo is indeed a great machine. Next to my original Mac II (1987: first Mac with color, first with expansion slots, first with a standalone monitor, etc.), this is the best all-round computer I've ever owned.

But...check out the latest edition of MacOSRumors. I know they're not the most reliable of sources, but their latest post regarding the next Ti sounds plausible:

867 MHz G4
Radeon 7500 with 32 megs
higher res screen
longer battery

They certainly have enough time to make all that happen, and that's exactly what I'm looking for....</STRONG>

I am with you on this. That is what I am waiting for as well. A 733MHz or 867MHz Ti will definitely get my attention and....my money.

I love my PISMO and I can wait until MWNY.

[skyman]

Originally posted by Fyre4ce:
<STRONG>Pismo is a 100 MHz bus, not 66. The previous machines, Lombards, had the 66. The Pismo is still a good machine.</STRONG>

Thank you.

[skyman]

Originally posted by cowerd:
<STRONG>
Believe it or not you will see at least a 2x speed improvement, as you're moving from a 66mhz bus to a 133mhz bus, and a G3 to a G4, as well as a much better video card, larger screen and lighter weight. Slightly worse wireless reception if you use Apple airport card.

But if all that matters is the 800 on the processor then by all means wait.</STRONG>

The 667Ti is NO where near a 2X speed improvement over the 400MHz PISMO. You should review the bench marks.

[DKeithA]

Apple: Hardware on Hold

Message to Apple: Purchase of new PowerBook on hold.

[msykes]

Originally posted by skyman:
<STRONG>

The 667Ti is NO where near a 2X speed improvement over the 400MHz PISMO. You should review the bench marks. </STRONG>

Hmmm, could someone point me (us) to some benchmarks? I searched over at xlr8yourmac.com, but couldn't easily find any direct comparisons.

I bet that the Pismo(400) vs. Ti(667) could be anywhere from comparable in speed to finding the Pismo *much* slower at some things. It would all come down to whether or not something was G4 optimized, right?

For example, from the rc5 page: http://n0cgi.distributed.net/speed/q...=2&contest=rc5


Power PC 750 G3 - 400 - 1,316,719
vs
Power PC 7450/7455 G4 - 667 - 6,815,067

The last number (bigger is better) is an indication of speed... and clearly the G4 is much more than twice as fast... more like 5 times as fast by my math.

[skyman]

Originally posted by DKeithA:
<STRONG>Apple: Hardware on Hold

Message to Apple: Purchase of new PowerBook on hold.</STRONG>

EXACTLY!!

[mugwump]

Yeah, I'm on hold as well. The screen is a bit dull; they should cut that iBook screen to fit the Ti. The processor speed is also dull, even with the december bump. This new low powered apollo chip is an improvement, but duals would be more powerful.

Finally, is there anything that can be done with the mobo to make things more snappy? To me it's all about Final Cut Pro editing.

But the next revision should get me into a g4 powerbook from my g3 400.

[skyman]

Originally posted by msykes:
<STRONG>

Hmmm, could someone point me (us) to some benchmarks? I searched over at xlr8yourmac.com, but couldn't easily find any direct comparisons.

I bet that the Pismo(400) vs. Ti(667) could be anywhere from comparable in speed to finding the Pismo *much* slower at some things. It would all come down to whether or not something was G4 optimized, right?

For example, from the rc5 page: http://n0cgi.distributed.net/speed/q...=2&contest=rc5


Power PC 750 G3 - 400 - 1,316,719
vs
Power PC 7450/7455 G4 - 667 - 6,815,067

The last number (bigger is better) is an indication of speed... and clearly the G4 is much more than twice as fast... more like 5 times as fast by my math.</STRONG>

Yes, and if you bothered to research these figures you would have found that the 667 tests were done using OS X which is optimized for the G4 and uses ALTIVEC. Where as the 400 tests were run under OS 9.

Like I said before, do your research.

[mrtew]

Originally posted by mudmonkey:
<STRONG>

They're awake. You would feel no difference between 667 and 800. It has been a long held experience that anything less than a 25% difference is unnoticable by computer users. It is all in your mind. </STRONG>

I sure felt a big difference between my Ti400 and my Ti667! I guess that's more than a 25% bump though so maybe I still have my mind. I wish that it was an 800 though... in fact I wish we were ahead of PC's in MHz already... Geez why is it so hard?

[cowerd]

Yes, and if you bothered to research these figures you would have found that the 667 tests were done using OS X which is optimized for the G4 and uses ALTIVEC. Where as the 400 tests were run under OS 9.

Like I said before, do your research.

You just don't get it do you? When you benchmark you're gonna loose with a G3 Pismo vs. a G4 Ti. Most major bencharks run are PS bench, Cinebench, ATTO throughput, Quake frames, Walker 3D.

You're gonna loose Cinebench and PS Bench due to altivec. You're gonna get smoked with Quake because of GPU. Altivec is one of those things that are different between the Pismo and the Ti and a valid measure of the performance differences betwen the two machines. If you want things to be truly fair we could duct tape off the portion of the Ti screen, so theres no unfair advantage ther either. Just say that you're not gonna buy anything til Apple reaches 800mhz and you'll stop having to justify the decision.

[skyman]

Originally posted by cowerd:
<STRONG>
You just don't get it do you? When you benchmark you're gonna loose with a G3 Pismo vs. a G4 Ti. Most major bencharks run are PS bench, Cinebench, ATTO throughput, Quake frames, Walker 3D.

You're gonna loose Cinebench and PS Bench due to altivec. You're gonna get smoked with Quake because of GPU. Altivec is one of those things that are different between the Pismo and the Ti and a valid measure of the performance differences betwen the two machines. If you want things to be truly fair we could duct tape off the portion of the Ti screen, so theres no unfair advantage ther either. Just say that you're not gonna buy anything til Apple reaches 800mhz and you'll stop having to justify the decision.</STRONG>

I SURRENDER!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Macrat]

Originally posted by DKeithA:
<STRONG>Apple: Hardware on Hold

Message to Apple: Purchase of new PowerBook on hold.</STRONG>

Same here. I've got the cash burning a hole in my pocket for a low end Powerbook, but a measley 73mhz faster processor over my 1.5 year old ibook is hardly a worthwhile upgrade, even when going from G3 to G4.

[msykes]

Originally posted by skyman:
<STRONG>


Yes, and if you bothered to research these figures you would have found that the 667 tests were done using OS X which is optimized for the G4 and uses ALTIVEC. Where as the 400 tests were run under OS 9.

Like I said before, do your research. </STRONG>

First of all, I was asking for benchmarks. If you have some, please show them to us!

Secondly, I did do my research. The figures I quoted for the G3 were done under OS8, OS9, OSX 10.1, OSX Server, and Linux. And all perform quite similarily.

Besides, you do realize that G3's don't have an altivec unit, right? So altivec optimization isn't going to help them.

--------

Maybe I'll look for/start a benchmarks thread.

[DKeithA]

"We're not planning to introduce any new CPUs at Macworld Tokyo, as a matter of fact, we're set for some months now," said Joswiak. "Having just updated all four product quadrants, it's really nonsensical to think we're about to update the quadrants again at Macworld Tokyo."

The more I think about this, the angrier I get. Joswiak may think it is "nonsensical" to think that Apple is about to update their products again at Macworld Tokyo.

Well I think it is nonsensical for Apple to even think that any remotely aware PowerBook user is going to pay $2300 - $3000 for a laptop that really has not been updated since October of 2001. That is truly ludicrous. Kiss my ass, Apple. Kiss my hard-earned money good-bye while you're at it.

[ 02-15-2002: Message edited by: DKeithA ]

[skyman]

Originally posted by DKeithA:
<STRONG>"We're not planning to introduce any new CPUs at Macworld Tokyo, as a matter of fact, we're set for some months now," said Joswiak. "Having just updated all four product quadrants, it's really nonsensical to think we're about to update the quadrants again at Macworld Tokyo."

The more I think about this, the angrier I get. Joswiak may think it is "nonsensical" to think that Apple is about to update their products again at Macworld Tokyo.

Well I think it is nonsensical for Apple to even think that any remotely aware PowerBook user is going to pay $2300 - $3000 for a laptop that really has not been updated since October of 2001. That is truly ludicrous. Kiss my ass, Apple. Kiss my hard-earned money good-bye while you're at it.

[ 02-15-2002: Message edited by: DKeithA ]</STRONG>

AGREED!

[iBook2]

This thread is entertaining!!!

People constantly bitch no matter what!!!

This all sounds exactly what people were saying before Apple even had a G4 powerbook.

Really people if you complain so much, go buy a Wintel machine.

Apple will do what it wants when it wants.
That is one thing I have learned using them for the last 10 years! and you know what, I still use them! and so will you!

[talisker]

Originally posted by iBook2:
<STRONG>This thread is entertaining!!!

People constantly bitch no matter what!!!

This all sounds exactly what people were saying before Apple even had a G4 powerbook.

Really people if you complain so much, go buy a Wintel machine.

Apple will do what it wants when it wants.
That is one thing I have learned using them for the last 10 years! and you know what, I still use them! and so will you!</STRONG>

Absolutely. Why on earth do people get angry because Apple have said they wont be releasing a new model for a few more months? So you've used the Powerbook and found it's not fast enough for you? Don't buy it then. The Mhz obsessed whiners on these boards are a tiny irrelevant fraction of the market, who will never be satisfied with the current product. Apple sensibly doesnt pander to them.

[msykes]

Originally posted by talisker:
<STRONG>

Absolutely. Why on earth do people get angry because Apple have said they wont be releasing a new model for a few more months? So you've used the Powerbook and found it's not fast enough for you? Don't buy it then. The Mhz obsessed whiners on these boards are a tiny irrelevant fraction of the market, who will never be satisfied with the current product. Apple sensibly doesnt pander to them.</STRONG>

Okay, first of all I do agree there is a lot of random MHz whining that goes on. However, there are those of us who are just interested in Apple's product offerings, and like to endlessly speculate about them.

I for one think it's curious that Apple's top end Powerbook is "only" 667 MHz, while it's low-end G4 iMac is 700 Mhz for less than half the price. Sure, sure, you pay more for portable, blah blah blah but I think it would be a good move on Apple's part to bump those sooner rather than later.

Part of why I am concerned about MHz is that I would really like Apple to gain more market share. Yeah, they are never going to win the battle, but 10% would be nice instead of 5. Low-MHz machines, and seeming disparity amongst product lines are not going to help bring people over to Apple's side.

I mean really, the only thing less useful than whining about Mhz, is whining about people whining about MHz!

Now who wants to comment on those Rumors on www.mosr.com the other day?!

Black titaniums, that could be cool, and better iBook graphics surely must mean better Ti graphics too! :-)

[k2man]

You're not 'whining' if you're disappointed that Apple won't refresh a major hardware line after 6 months, especially when the line already lags behind Wintel brands in a few significant areas (speed, screen res, and to a lesser extent, graphics).

It would be **good** for Apple to get more aggressive in refreshing systems more quickly. If they updated the Powerbook every 6-7 months, it would cut down on a lot of 'whining' because people wouldn't have to wait another 9-10 months for a new machine, in case the current model didn't deliver what they needed. Part of the frustration with Apple stems from the fact that they're so aggressive in claiming the PowerBook is such a powerhouse, and yet high end PC laptops had combo drives way beforehand (and now have combos running at 16x by the way), are generally faster (I'm not comparing MHz, I'm comparing head to head speed trials), have higher res screens, and starting with the Dell, have graphics engines like the Radeon 7500. I know the Powerbook has a lead in other areas that I appreciate (battery, wide screen, form factor, weight, elegance of X), but there's definitely room for improvement, and I'd like to see it sooner rather than later. It's not asking too much. I know enough about product design and manufacturing to know that Apple could structure its development process to incorporate small changes more quickly, as they become available (they seem to be more aggressive with the iBook, by the way). It just takes planning and some discipline. Lots of other companies do it, and it would only make Apple a better company...

Anyway, regarding the MOSR rumors, I think I'd still opt for the silver look of the current Titanium, just cause it's so different. But I've been thinking about that new screen res (1538x1024?) and am now worried that it's actually too high. That's a fair amount beyond the Ibook's dpi, which for me marks the limits of usability (without eye damage). I'd be all for 1538x1024 if there was also a lower res as well (like something around 1200 horizontally), but have you noticed how crappy a LCD looks when you run it at a res it's not optimized for??

[Rumpole]

I speak as someone who has previously been a Mac user, but who 3 years ago went over to Windows to be more "compatable". For 9 months or so I have been following the progress of the Tibook, with a view to buying one and returning to the Mac community. I have to say that the reports of the durability (perceived or otherwise) of the finish on the Ti casing is somewhat off-putting, especially when such issues do not impact upon the decision to purchase a Windows laptop. I have a 233 Mhz Pentium I laptop which actually does what I want to do. It runs Office 2000 perfectly, and will probably last for years to come. That is not to say that I would not replace it tomorrow with a Tibook if I felt comfortable doing so. All my (Windows) collegues never think of "babying" their laptops. The issue doesn't arise. Apple has a truely unique product (conceptually) in the Tibook, but in order to encourage Windows users to defect they have got to produce a machine that is capable (without special treatment) of being able to withstand the quite ordinary rigours of office life. The fan issue is just whining. The durability issue is more fundamental.

[ 02-21-2002: Message edited by: Rumpole ]

[romeosc]

The Ti is durable, but the finish is not.

Apple is able to charge more fot their top of the line products, because there always will be those that are willing to pay extra to have something that stands out and is desired! It is like so many of us in America who have "living and dining" rooms that are never used for living or dining...... they are works of art meant to be admired.

Very few of us "need" more mhz, but we "WANT" it. I remember when a "48 K Apple II" was top dog and we thought we would never be able to fill up the 128k floppy disk......but we all have to keep the economy going by buying more disposable items!

Apple knows the percentage of customers in each of its quadrants and makes products to appeal to each of them. They want us to lust after the unobtainable.....

Most people get mad when Apple comes out with a new more powerful product right after they bought the current one.

"Those that are on the cutting edge of technology are come up bloody"

The more often the cycle the more blood.

[msykes]

Originally posted by k2man:
<STRONG>
Anyway, regarding the MOSR rumors, I think I'd still opt for the silver look of the current Titanium, just cause it's so different. But I've been thinking about that new screen res (1538x1024?) and am now worried that it's actually too high. That's a fair amount beyond the Ibook's dpi, which for me marks the limits of usability (without eye damage). I'd be all for 1538x1024 if there was also a lower res as well (like something around 1200 horizontally), but have you noticed how crappy a LCD looks when you run it at a res it's not optimized for??</STRONG>

I agree, I'm really not sure I want a higher resolution. On my Lombard I have the same pixel density... and granted I dont' do a lot of video editing or illustrator that requires tons of windows, but it's a very nice resolution. At work I use a 19" CRT with 1600x1200, and I have to change all my default fonts so that I can read them. This wreaks havoc with a lot of webpages, and is generally a pain.

As for the durability, I agree on this one. I don't want to have to baby a laptop I'll have for 2-3 years! Stick a G4 in an iBook and I would be *very* tempted by them!

[Adam E]

I definitely plan to buy a Ti after the next revision, but the screen resolution is a big problem for me right now. I know people have legitimate disagreements over pixel density/resolution, but i'm fairly certain there is a strong contingent of power users (including me) who will be incredibly disappointed once again if the screen res isn't bumped.
Keep in the mind Photoshop for X will be out soon and more screen area is always a plus for graphic designers. This is only a hunch, but if their eyes couldn't handle a 1536x1024 display they probably wouldn't be doing graphic design in the first place.
The typical resolution on a higher end 14' Wintel laptop these days is 1400x1050--it's also possible to see 1600x1200 on some Dells and IBMs. 1536x1024 on the Ti's widescreen would be less squashed than 1400x1050, and OS X's menu bars and widgets are larger than anything in Windows pre-XP.
I want a 32Mb graphics card and 867/733 like everyone else, but the screen resolution is a much more important issue. I hope Apple is listening.