[Podolsky]

Intel-based hardware seems to enjoying the Year of the Laptop that Jobs promised to Apple customers. What's up with that? While the 17 incher is great it alone will not make this a Year of the Laptop for Apple. I have $$ to replace a Tibook 667 but it may go to a Wintel Machine unless Apple comes up with something that can compete. Even the most optimistic rumors for what a 15 incher will look like seem to leave Apple way behind relative to Intel........

[icruise]

[eevyl]

Post some facts, some specs, something else than a rant...

[euphras]

At the moment nearly everyone accepts the fact that in the notebook sector Apple�s products CAN compete with the Wintel ones (unfortunately it is the only sector )

So, what�s your point?

[acadian]

While I agree with the sentiment, switching over to wintel presents loads of problems for me. Not only do I have alot of money invested in Apple hardware, but also third party periph's and software alone. I think one of two things will have to happen this year to make it the "year of the laptop", either the 970 or dual G4's. That said, is Apple were to introduce a 17" with even a 1.25 G4 and the 9600 in the next 6 weeks, I would grab it. My next unit will definately be the 17" though, as tempting as a 15" Al would be.

[S S]

All I've seen from Wintel are comercials showing laptops with wireless internet. Woo Hoo, my PowerBook G4 400 could do that years ago. And tablet PC's. There are a few people that may need them, like those poeple on 24 who need to look important. My screen has enough finger prints on it already and I'm not even trying to touch it. So what is so great about "centrino" or whatever? Besides all the marketing gimiks.

[Mastrap]

There is not a single PC laptop that can compete with the current Apple range IMO. The 12" is probably the most competitive sub-notebook on the market, especially when equipped with the superdrive. Battery life is excellent, price extremely competitive. PC notebooks tend to be neutered speed wise too. The 15" is getting a tad long in the tooth but will be replaced soon. The 17" has been rapturously received, both by users and by the press.

To say that its the year of the laptop for PCs and not for Macs is a truly bizarre statement to make.

[djjava]

Originally posted by Podolsky:
Intel-based hardware seems to enjoying the Year of the Laptop that Jobs promised to Apple customers. What's up with that? While the 17 incher is great it alone will not make this a Year of the Laptop for Apple. I have $$ to replace a Tibook 667 but it may go to a Wintel Machine unless Apple comes up with something that can compete. Even the most optimistic rumors for what a 15 incher will look like seem to leave Apple way behind relative to Intel........

one undeniable fact... any wintel laptop can be blown away by whatever Apple puts into the market... main reason: Windows.

There is a reason why so many people switch... and that is Windows (98, Me, 2000, XP... ). If hardware and money was the reason, then there would a lot less switchers (like me) out there. You can't be productive if your crappy Windows machine crashes all the time.

[PBAddict]

I am not flaming, but would be grateful if you could define the areas in which apple is not competing

[Peter]

Year of the laptop -
what two new powerbooks released, an iBook update all within the first 4 months isn't enough?

[tonewheel]

...and the original psoter is nowhere to be found...

[PeterKG]

Originally posted by tonewheel:
...and the original psoter is nowhere to be found...

[Podolsky]

No, I am here but just running around. I have always been willing to pay a premium for Apple hardware and I probably will continue. But, this weekend I saw a new gen Toshiba that had some really impressive features in terms of battery life, graphics and cpu and was way cheaper than our Apples. Reality check is that there is still a lot of the Year of Laptop left, heck it is only the end of Q1 - but I challenge Apple to really put something great out there this year so I can buy and have it last, really last, at least 2 years.

[schmoe]

Well, let's compare the top of the line PC notebook, the
IBM ThinkPad T40p with the top of the line Apple notebook, the 17" PowerBook G4

Code:
                PowerBook               ThinkPad

Processor*:     G4 1ghz                 Pentium-M 1.6ghz
Cache:          1mb L3                  1mb L2
RAM/Max:        PC2700 DDR 512mb/1gb    PC2100 DDR 512mb/2gb
FSB Speed~:     167mhz                  400mhz

IDE Spec        ATA-100                 ATA-100
HD              60gb 4200 RPM           40gb 5400 RPM
CD-RW/DVD+      CD-RW/DVD-R             CD-RW/DVD-ROM

Graphics-:      GeForce4 440 Go/64mb    Mobility FireGL 9000/64mb         
Screen size:    17"                     14.1"
Resolution:     1440x900                1400x1050

Size (HxWxD):   1.0" x 15.4" x 10.2"    1.0" x 12.2" x 10" 
Weight:         6.8lb                   4.9lb

Battery Life:   4.5 hours               7.0 hours

Wireless^:      802.11g, BT, IRDA       802.11a/b, BT, IRDA
Ethernet:       10/100/1000             10/100/1000

USB:            2 x 1.1                 2 x 2.0
FireWire:       1 x 400, 1 x 800        None
PCMCIA:         1 x Type II             2 x Type II

Price:          $3,299.00               $3,349.00         
Waranty         1 year                  3 years

* since real world benchmarks show the Pentium-M around the speed of a P4-M
2.2-2.4ghz, and in non Altivec tests the G4 is about the same clock-for-clock
as a P3/P4, I think it is fair to say the ThinkPad is more than double the
speed of the Powerbook.

~ The PowerBook has faster RAM, but since the system bus is a fraction of the speed, it is pretty pointless.

+ No "SuperDrive" yet available in the tiny UltraBay slim configuration, but
since it is swappable there will be one and future upgrades are possible.

- Hard to compare these two, the FireGL is a high-end OpenGL specialized
mobile version of the Radeon 9000 and not often used. However the Radeon 9000
is quite a bit better than the 440 Go according to Tom's hardware
http://www6.tomshardware.com/mobile/...on9000-03.html
so I'd bet on the FireGL.

^ 802.11g is probably the best choice, once the spec is finalized and more
interoperable with 802.11b without loosing speed. Then again having the
dual band technology of 802.11a and b together is nice too.

----

Conclusion? Well it certainly seems like there is a PC laptop that
competes with the best Apple has to offer. Fact of the matter is the PC
laptop is superior in every respect but two: aesthetics and Firewire. Some
may say the 17" screen is better, but then some would say that the higher
resolution combined with smaller size of the 14.1" is better.

The PC laptop is far faster, smaller, lighter, gets more battery life, is
more upgradable and expandable, etc. Granted it can't hold a candle to the
beauty of a PowerBook, but it does have a certain industrial appeal.

Anyway I posted this for two reasons, #1 in the hopes that Apple stops resting
on its laurels and really competes, and #2 to dispel the myths regarding
PC laptops. It is true that Apple has been ahead in laptops with regards to
battery life, Firewire, wireless, gigabit ethernet, combodrives, etc but those days have come to a close. I hope they return because I would like to buy
another Apple machine for my wife.

[dampeoples]

My ibook has lasted 2 years...

[euphras]

Quote:
"I am not flaming, but would be grateful if you could define the areas in which apple is not competing"

Well, honestly, at the moment.....if i�d need a WAY FAST box (RAW SPEED....), i�d get a double prozessor Athlon rig running some Linux distro...

PPC 970 could change it all (hopefully soon) within a blink of an eye

[swsteckly]

Unless you are rendering or something, I don't see how processor speed even matters. Does the OS feel snappy and responsive? Do programs launch quickly and perform well?

Than the processor is plenty fast enough. Apple hardware simply blows away anything else, and it's a major steal if you ask me. You know why? Because it runs Mac OS X, the best os on the market.

A 12" subnotebook (that still retains big-book features like a SuperDrive, and a full complement of I/O ports), a 17" PowerBook, a first in the world of portables, with the I/O features of a desktop, new consumer-level iBooks, and an unknown device coming in the fall to replace the 15" Titanium, still one of the best computers on the market?

In the first FOUR MONTHS?

Sounds like a heck of a year for the notebook.

Also, did you see how many apple portables were shipped last quarter? Over 40%. Apple is well on track to have notebook sales surpass desktops sales THIS year.

[Podolsky]

Originally posted by schmoe:
Well, let's compare the top of the line PC notebook, the
IBM ThinkPad T40p with the top of the line Apple notebook, the 17" PowerBook G4

Code:
                PowerBook               ThinkPad

Processor*:     G4 1ghz                 Pentium-M 1.6ghz
Cache:          1mb L3                  1mb L2
RAM/Max:        PC2700 DDR 512mb/1gb    PC2100 DDR 512mb/2gb
FSB Speed~:     167mhz                  400mhz

IDE Spec        ATA-100                 ATA-100
HD              60gb 4200 RPM           40gb 5400 RPM
CD-RW/DVD+      CD-RW/DVD-R             CD-RW/DVD-ROM

Graphics-:      GeForce4 440 Go/64mb    Mobility FireGL 9000/64mb         
Screen size:    17"                     14.1"
Resolution:     1440x900                1400x1050

Size (HxWxD):   1.0" x 15.4" x 10.2"    1.0" x 12.2" x 10" 
Weight:         6.8lb                   4.9lb

Battery Life:   4.5 hours               7.0 hours

Wireless^:      802.11g, BT, IRDA       802.11a/b, BT, IRDA
Ethernet:       10/100/1000             10/100/1000

USB:            2 x 1.1                 2 x 2.0
FireWire:       1 x 400, 1 x 800        None
PCMCIA:         1 x Type II             2 x Type II

Price:          $3,299.00               $3,349.00         
Waranty         1 year                  3 years

* since real world benchmarks show the Pentium-M around the speed of a P4-M
2.2-2.4ghz, and in non Altivec tests the G4 is about the same clock-for-clock
as a P3/P4, I think it is fair to say the ThinkPad is more than double the
speed of the Powerbook.

~ The PowerBook has faster RAM, but since the system bus is a fraction of the speed, it is pretty pointless.

+ No "SuperDrive" yet available in the tiny UltraBay slim configuration, but
since it is swappable there will be one and future upgrades are possible.

- Hard to compare these two, the FireGL is a high-end OpenGL specialized
mobile version of the Radeon 9000 and not often used. However the Radeon 9000
is quite a bit better than the 440 Go according to Tom's hardware
http://www6.tomshardware.com/mobile/...on9000-03.html
so I'd bet on the FireGL.

^ 802.11g is probably the best choice, once the spec is finalized and more
interoperable with 802.11b without loosing speed. Then again having the
dual band technology of 802.11a and b together is nice too.

----

Conclusion? Well it certainly seems like there is a PC laptop that
competes with the best Apple has to offer. Fact of the matter is the PC
laptop is superior in every respect but two: aesthetics and Firewire. Some
may say the 17" screen is better, but then some would say that the higher
resolution combined with smaller size of the 14.1" is better.

The PC laptop is far faster, smaller, lighter, gets more battery life, is
more upgradable and expandable, etc. Granted it can't hold a candle to the
beauty of a PowerBook, but it does have a certain industrial appeal.

Anyway I posted this for two reasons, #1 in the hopes that Apple stops resting
on its laurels and really competes, and #2 to dispel the myths regarding
PC laptops. It is true that Apple has been ahead in laptops with regards to
battery life, Firewire, wireless, gigabit ethernet, combodrives, etc but those days have come to a close. I hope they return because I would like to buy
another Apple machine for my wife.

[Podolsky]

sorry....This was very useful. Actually, it was a Toshiba I saw but didn't notice the model number. It had great battery life and better GPU. I can find out what it was but I don't think it matters that much. We pay more and wait longer for beauty.....I think it is worth it but I may opt out and try a Wintel machine to wait for when Apple decides to really compete on performance.....

[seanyepez]

Saying the higher-resolution, 14-inch panel IBM uses in its ThinkPad notebooks is just as good as the 17-inch PowerBook's LCD is idiotic.

Apple has the access to the same components IBM uses in its notebooks. The beauty of the 17-inch PowerBook is its gorgeous screen. If Apple wanted to use a higher-resolution panel, they could. Obviously, they don't want to. Having to squint to read text detracts from the overall aesthetic appeal of a machine's LCD screen.

[pamelah]

Originally posted by PeterClark2002:
Year of the laptop -
what two new powerbooks released, an iBook update all within the first 4 months isn't enough?

and add an upgrade of some sort to the 15"(not dual or anything outrageous) and i would say that's enough to make it the year of the laptop.

[schmoe]

Toshiba has some fancy machines too, all notebook makers will be building Pentium-M systems, and Toshiba has always been one of the best. Kinda ugly though imho...

Being able to choose from so many different models and configurations of PC notebook is another benefit. And I didn't point out that the ThinkPad has a 3 year warranty and is built like a tank. IBM's laptops last forever and can take massive abuse. My TiG4 667 seemed extremely fragile.

Screen size vs resolution is a matter of taste, I wouldn't think it is worth flaming over. Personally I have good vision and this magical thing called "120 dpi fonts", so even 1600x1200 at 15" is very nice and requires no squinting. The higher the DPI of a screen the better I say, big pixels suck.

[Maquero]

do we really need to have this argue all over again?
please dont feed the trolls

[7Macfreak]

ok this is a serious question.. i'm not trying to be a smartass or anything. why dont you buy what you like (the toshiba with its awesome features) right now esp. when you can afford to do so?

[spaced]

Why a Mac?

2 things...

1) OS X
2) PCs look like crap

and that's the bottom line.

[goMac]

Clock for clock with the G4/P4?

I can beat a friend in Warcraft 3 load times with my 1 ghz G4 vs. his 2 ghz Dell desktop. Quite a feat considering the un-optimized state of wc3 for OS X, and the 4800 rpm hard drive in my powerbook.

[dettociao]

Originally posted by Mastrap:

To say that its the year of the laptop for PCs and not for Macs is a truly bizarre statement to make.

I couldn't agree more. How could you say this with Apple revolutionizing the portable-market? This is (one of the) only places where Apple can actually compete.

[Tritium]

Originally posted by goMac:
Clock for clock with the G4/P4?

I can beat a friend in Warcraft 3 load times with my 1 ghz G4 vs. his 2 ghz Dell desktop. Quite a feat considering the un-optimized state of wc3 for OS X, and the 4800 rpm hard drive in my powerbook.

Yeah, we all know that the speed of a computer is directly proportional to how quickly a game STARTS....

[7Macfreak]

Originally posted by spaced:
Why a Mac?

2 things...

1) OS X
2) PCs look like crap

and that's the bottom line.

no offense but that question was for the creator of this thread. i mean whats the point in bitching about apple when there is another product that he likes and can afford to buy. why wait?

[dettociao]

Originally posted by 7Macfreak:
no offense but that question was for the creator of this thread. i mean whats the point in bitching about apple when there is another product that he likes and can afford to buy. why wait?

Because he's unsatisfied with Apple (delays, "perceived" performance/cost ratio, etc). What people here would call a troll.

[Edited for content]

[donutogre]

while i love my mac just as much as the next guy, i also agree with giving credit where credit is due.

until recently, apple did have the upper hand on laptops in almost every aspect of the game. small, thin, light, good screens, full featured, great battery life, wireless, and at prices that were competitive.

however, centrino has changed a lot of that. it used to be a pc laptop was either real powerful with piss poor battery life at a large form factor, or small and underfeatured w/decent battery life. however, they now have achieved a similar blend of size + features + battery life to the apple line, while clearly offering a superior processor.

i'm willing to bet that apple will address this in "year of the notebook part 2," but with the advances to the PC notebook this half of the year, their work is definitly cut out for them.

[goMac]

Originally posted by Tritium:
Yeah, we all know that the speed of a computer is directly proportional to how quickly a game STARTS....

I mean by load time of a game, as in a network game, who flips green first.

Sure, its not a super accurate test, but it certainly is a show of real world performance

[7Macfreak]

Originally posted by dettociao:
Because he's unsatisfied with Apple (delays, "perceived" performance/cost ratio, etc). What people here would call a troll.

[Edited for content]

so its safe to call him an idiot?

[Mohammed Al-Sabah]

ok here it goes..


1) i do think apple is behind in the speed and all and would like to see faster computers in the future and soon..

2) just got the pb17 so hmm dont want to see a upgrade for at least 6 months lol

3) lets give apple a break here we cant expect apple to compeat with everthing and we would not like to see apple have major speed bumps why? most of us that have the current computers would be dead slow and things wont work on it.. best thing is to go slow not fast.. anything that goes up fast comes down even faster..

4) apple is ONE company .. how would that be possible to compeat with all the wintell computer makers out there?

5) apple market share is nothing like the others . apple doesnt have enough buyers to preform what u guys want it to do

6) speed is not everything.. most of us dont even use the speed that we have. yes in the pc world 2ghz or 4 ghz and so forth but seriusly most of pc useeers dont even use that speed so pointless..

its like haveing a car that goes 200MPH but in real like u cant really go that fast

i hope i didnt make a fool of my self posting this hehhe

good luck all

APPLE ALL THE WAY!

[PoisonTooth]

Originally posted by eevyl:
Post some facts, some specs, something else than a rant...

Podolsky is spot-on you guys. Why are you guys giving him rolleyes and provoking him?

Out of all the Mac forums out there, you folks consistently refuse to look at the other side of the fence and assess the market from a realistic viewpoint. It's amazing.

[PoisonTooth]

Originally posted by S S:
All I've seen from Wintel are comercials showing laptops with wireless internet. Woo Hoo, my PowerBook G4 400 could do that years ago. And tablet PC's. There are a few people that may need them, like those poeple on 24 who need to look important. My screen has enough finger prints on it already and I'm not even trying to touch it. So what is so great about "centrino" or whatever? Besides all the marketing gimiks.

Centrino is three things:

Banias CPU
Intel 855PM chipset
Intel 2100 Pro wireless card

The most notable thing is the Banias CPU, which, at 1.6 GHz, is faster than a desktop P4 at 2.4 GHz. Along with that, you get a vastly improved battery life and very low heat emissions.

[twil13]

Thank you PoisonTooth! About time somebody actually knows what the centrino platform is. I am a PC guy ATM, but I really want to switch to apple. The only thing that is holding me back is the power situation. Apple is not competing with centrino right now, because centrino was designed from the ground up for laptop computers, not just another toned down desktop P4. That is why you can get an centrino laptop with 7 hours of battery life and out perform 2.4 Ghz P4's. Enough rambling about centrino.

I really want to see the 970 in powermacs and laptops by september, and I for one think that apple really needs it. The only reason apple is staying in the game, is due to their incredible aestetics compared to any other computer.

I am definately going to switch to mac. I have made up my mind, but I wont do it until they can actually compete in the speed area. I focused on the laptop power situation, because I want a PB But the power problems lie in all the platforms for apple.

Tony

[PoisonTooth]

Originally posted by twil13:
Thank you PoisonTooth! About time somebody actually knows what the centrino platform is. I am a PC guy ATM, but I really want to switch to apple. The only thing that is holding me back is the power situation. Apple is not competing with centrino right now, because centrino was designed from the ground up for laptop computers, not just another toned down desktop P4. That is why you can get an centrino laptop with 7 hours of battery life and out perform 2.4 Ghz P4's. Enough rambling about centrino.

I really want to see the 970 in powermacs and laptops by september, and I for one think that apple really needs it. The only reason apple is staying in the game, is due to their incredible aestetics compared to any other computer.

I am definately going to switch to mac. I have made up my mind, but I wont do it until they can actually compete in the speed area. I focused on the laptop power situation, because I want a PB But the power problems lie in all the platforms for apple.

Tony

I've ordered a ThinkPad T40, and I should get it soon. If I like it as much as I think I will, I wil be selling my new TiBook (1 GHz, 1 GB RAM).

Once Apple gets a new CPU in its machines, I very well might buy another Mac, but right now, the speed delta is just too great for me to ignore. I use my computers for just about everything, I cannot stand a sluggish machine, especially when it's among the most expensive hardware on the market.

I love OSX and Macs, but their performance really isn't where it needs to be for me right now.

My .02 alone.

[squish]

it seems to be another case of the classic "look ma, we've got this too!" Should we be happy that PCs are finally small and thin? or should we be pissed that it's taken so damn long? Mac users have enjoyed this for quite some time, and that's a fact.

btw, the look ma thing also happened with firewire (only PCs use a crappier version) and the fact that Windows has a "blue" (hence aqua-looking) interface.

[cwasko]

Originally posted by PoisonTooth:
Podolsky is spot-on you guys. Why are you guys giving him rolleyes and provoking him?

Out of all the Mac forums out there, you folks consistently refuse to look at the other side of the fence and assess the market from a realistic viewpoint. It's amazing.

Whatever.

Maybe I actualy care about the OS I use. I loate Windows and if Apple up-and-disappeared, I'd be using Linux. Windows CAN NOT offer me the capabilities that my 17" does while running OSX. To me it is all about the software that I can run - not the hardware it runs on. Some people like to tell me that the PCs run faster than my Mac does. Maybe they do, maybe they don't. All I know is that my Mac does everything I need to do instantaneously, so how much faster can it be? So, since the hardware is now 'equalized', what is left besides the software and OS?

If you like your winblows machines, then go use them. If you don't care what OS/Software combination you are using, then... yea, I could see looking into Windows machines. But, as I said, I do care about what the computer runs and I don't care for Windows. So, what part of that do all you "you-should-be-buying-pc-laptop-becasue-the-hardware-is-faster" freaks not understand?

[katorga]

I do wish Apple would bite the bullet and build x86 macs. That would solve the speed argument and lower costs. OSX started out as NeXTstep which ran natively on the 486. OSX is an easy port to x86 and SSE2. Once OSX was running on apple x86 computers its just a hop skip and a jump to porting VMware (the coolest program ever) and wine to the platform.

Conceivably, Apple could take the OSS wine code and build in seamless ability to run windows apps native under OSX if they were on the x86 platform. Imagine a system that looks like a Mac (the coolest cases, formfactors, and styles available), that runs as fast as the fastest PC (cause it uses the same cpu and memory), runs OSX native apps, OSS apps, seamlessly runs windows apps and games, and has access to tools like VMware for running other OS's in a virtual machines (no x86 emulation overhead like VPC has).

There would be nothing in today's PC market that could compare.

I would most certainly pay a premium price for an Apple designed and built x86 Mac compared to a standard PC clone.

[goMac]

Originally posted by katorga:
I do wish Apple would bite the bullet and build x86 macs. That would solve the speed argument and lower costs. OSX started out as NeXTstep which ran natively on the 486. OSX is an easy port to x86 and SSE2. Once OSX was running on apple x86 computers its just a hop skip and a jump to porting VMware (the coolest program ever) and wine to the platform.

Conceivably, Apple could take the OSS wine code and build in seamless ability to run windows apps native under OSX if they were on the x86 platform. Imagine a system that looks like a Mac (the coolest cases, formfactors, and styles available), that runs as fast as the fastest PC (cause it uses the same cpu and memory), runs OSX native apps, OSS apps, seamlessly runs windows apps and games, and has access to tools like VMware for running other OS's in a virtual machines (no x86 emulation overhead like VPC has).

There would be nothing in today's PC market that could compare.

I would most certainly pay a premium price for an Apple designed and built x86 Mac compared to a standard PC clone.

Except for the problem such a machine would be unable to run macintosh programs.

[magness]

Originally posted by goMac:
Except for the problem such a machine would be unable to run macintosh programs.

Presumably it wouldn't off the bat but I'm assuming that programs would be written in something that calls the API of the OS. If OSX is essentially a BSD code and the AQUA UI sits ontop of it, would recompiling AQUA (obviously I'm simplifying it) be half the battle since most programs call the AQUA API. Then all you have to do is tweak whatever you wrote the program in (C, Java yada yada yada) and bang presto program works. It would be an intresting exercise to do. Ne? At the speed most mac developers had switched from Classic to OSX, there wouldn't be that much development time involved too as you're preserving the functionality of the program.

I'm sure the cost savings of using the x86 architechure could be worth it to apple. It may certainly solve stock problems too since the x86 chips has got quite a market share out there.

[russell_w]

I just switched, always thought Macs were a joke, until I was shown OSX by a co-worker. I bought a 1Ghz 15" Tibook and love it. Coinsidently, 4 other coworkers bought TiBooks and use them for work (Java/Perl SW development) as well as play. It says something about a product if employees (not contractors) will spend their own money for a tool for their job.

Now at my new company, I use my TiBook for developing in a Windows environment, and VirtualPC runs well, but not great. With my iApps, Oracle and Java tools, slick OS and effortless networking, I have the envy of my coworkers who just got new 2Ghz Toshiba laptops w/ WinXP. IE crashes frequently on them, and our Windows app runs just as fast, if not faster, on my VirtualPC Tibook. I am also able to easily test our app against 3 different Win OS. I can easily move within buildings and different networks; it takes the other guys at least a half an hour to mess with config settings to ensure connectivity to the network. Now they are looking at personally purchasing an Apple for work, as well as play!

I love my TiBook; the only time I use my Wintel box at home now is when I run Remote Desktop connection from my TiBook wirelessly from the living room

Russell

[javabeans]

Originally posted by russell_w:
I just switched, always thought Macs were a joke, until I was shown OSX by a co-worker. I bought a 1Ghz 15" Tibook and love it. Coinsidently, 4 other coworkers bought TiBooks and use them for work (Java/Perl SW development) as well as play. It says something about a product if employees (not contractors) will spend their own money for a tool for their job.

Now at my new company, I use my TiBook for developing in a Windows environment, and VirtualPC runs well, but not great. With my iApps, Oracle and Java tools, slick OS and effortless networking, I have the envy of my coworkers who just got new 2Ghz Toshiba laptops w/ WinXP. IE crashes frequently on them, and our Windows app runs just as fast, if not faster, on my VirtualPC Tibook. I am also able to easily test our app against 3 different Win OS. I can easily move within buildings and different networks; it takes the other guys at least a half an hour to mess with config settings to ensure connectivity to the network. Now they are looking at personally purchasing an Apple for work, as well as play!

I love my TiBook; the only time I use my Wintel box at home now is when I run Remote Desktop connection from my TiBook wirelessly from the living room

Russell

I have never owned a mac before...and my 17" PB is on the way...I hope my experience will be as good as yours.

[Superchicken]

Just a few points saying the G4 in non altivec tests is as fast as a P4/P3 proves you're ignorant... the P3 is faster than the P4 at the same Mhz! The P3 is fairly comparable to a G3 which is comparable to a G4 cause aside from altivec they're almost the exact same.

The G4 is significantly faster than the P4... as is the Pentium M... which kinda sucks, because unless I'm mistaken a 1Ghz G4 does not beat a 1.6ghz PM... which uhh... yeah it sucks.

One advantage the G3s and G4s have is they were built partly for the embeded market so they have lots of power saving features the P4 doesn't have so they can survive in a notebook and do around as well as a Pentium M.

The problem is however that the Pentium M is a really well designed processor! Once the 970s come out it should be fair compettition again however, because they have low power versions at low Ghz that would cream a centrino.

But unless in august or something they unvail power books running low power 970s this won't be much of a year of the laptop...

side note... one thing that pisses me off is the lack of 1Ghz at least iBooks... if apple actually wanted to compete with the centrino laptops with the iBooks they actually could! Which makes it all the worse! The G3 actually scales better than the G4, and IBM could be providing them with much higher power G3s if they wanted.. but their marketing dept couldn't spin it well.

[goMac]

Originally posted by magness:
Presumably it wouldn't off the bat but I'm assuming that programs would be written in something that calls the API of the OS. If OSX is essentially a BSD code and the AQUA UI sits ontop of it, would recompiling AQUA (obviously I'm simplifying it) be half the battle since most programs call the AQUA API. Then all you have to do is tweak whatever you wrote the program in (C, Java yada yada yada) and bang presto program works. It would be an intresting exercise to do. Ne? At the speed most mac developers had switched from Classic to OSX, there wouldn't be that much development time involved too as you're preserving the functionality of the program.

The move from Classic to OS X wasn't very speedy. I'd say it took a year and a half to complete. And also imagine the mess. Someone goes out to the store and you have Mac Mac OS X software and PC OS X software and Hybreed Mac/PC OS X software. Not very simple. You'd have to depend on all the developers to release x86 versions (which would be a long shot considering most of them had a rough time making it to X). At this point developers probably WOULDN'T recode their software for x86 OS X but instead tell users to run the Windows versions under the WINE layer. This would kill the Mac API's basically, and OS X would become another Windows clone. Not Happy.

[PoisonTooth]

Originally posted by squish:
it seems to be another case of the classic "look ma, we've got this too!" Should we be happy that PCs are finally small and thin? or should we be pissed that it's taken so damn long? Mac users have enjoyed this for quite some time, and that's a fact.

btw, the look ma thing also happened with firewire (only PCs use a crappier version) and the fact that Windows has a "blue" (hence aqua-looking) interface.

Actually, PC notebooks have offered smaller-than-Apple models for some time now. Ever see the subnotebook machines?

And Centrino is more than a "me too" technology -- it's the best, fastest, most efficient mobile solution on the market right now. Apple needs to counter this as soon as it can.

[PoisonTooth]

Originally posted by cwasko:
Whatever.

Yes, exactly. The second someone shows an open mind towards Mac and Windows, go ahead and give him the rolleyes, because you don't understand how x86 notebooks can be decent.

Your reaction shows nothing but ignorance, arrogance, and condescension.

Maybe I actualy care about the OS I use. I loate Windows

Calling you out on this. Please elaborate, in detail, as to why you "loate" Windows.

Windows CAN NOT offer me the capabilities that my 17" does while running OSX.

Please explain. Whan can your 17" PB do with OSX that x86 hardware running XP Pro cannot?

To me it is all about the software that I can run - not the hardware it runs on.

Unless you're running specialized, Mac-only applications (FCP, etc.), this makes no sense.

Some people like to tell me that the PCs run faster than my Mac does. Maybe they do, maybe they don't.

The unfortunate reality is that Wintel machines run FAR faster than Macs. When I compare my TiBook to my friend's new Dell D800, the difference is staggering.

If/when Apple gets a new CPU, then hopefully they can close that gap.

So, since the hardware is now 'equalized'

Not so fast there -- how is the hardware "equalized?" It might be for whatever limited apps you're running, but for the real world in broadscope terms, x86 hardware handily trounces Apple's current lineup.

If you like your winblows machines, then go use them.

I have a TiBook and a WinXP desktop and neither one gives me any trouble whatsoever.

BTW, the second anyone calls Windows "winblows" or uses "M$" to try and be clever, his credibility swirls right down the toilet. Why? Because 9.9 times out of 10, that person cannot back up in any logical way why he hates Windows so much. He typically buys into marketing and cliche, and he spouts it at every turn without knowing anything about which he talks.

If you don't care what OS/Software combination you are using, then... yea, I could see looking into Windows machines.

You keep dogging Windows just like the Apple commercials say you should, but you've not once provided an example of why Windows is so pitiful when compared to OSX.

But, as I said, I do care about what the computer runs and I don't care for Windows.

Once again, what's your beef with Windows? You better have something good here, and not trite, contrived, marketing-speak.

I like many OSs -- OSX, Windows (2K and later only, however), and Linux. I don't understand the blind zealotry that goes on with some people here on MacNN. The Mac folks over at Ars are much more open-minded.

[PoisonTooth]

Originally posted by Superchic[k]en:
[B]The problem is however that the Pentium M is a really well designed processor! Once the 970s come out it should be fair compettition again however, because they have low power versions at low Ghz that would cream a centrino.

Agreed, but bear in mind that by the time Apple releases a mobile variant of the 970 (or whatever's next), the Banias CPU will be running upwards of 2 GHz, and perhaps as high as 2.5 (which, if extrapolating linearly, would put its performance along the same lines as a desktop P4 @ 3.75 GHz).

That's the tough thing about going head-to-head with x86 CPUs -- their progress is so quick and so steady, that even if a competitor gets a leg up (like AMD did a while back), they quickly lose it (evidenced by Intel once again ruling the IA32 roost).

Regardless, Apple cannot get a CPU too soon. When they do -- and if they market it correctly, and it stands up favorably under benchmark scrutiny -- they'll once again be competitive with x86 hardware, or at least closer to parity.