[Homer S.]

hey, can someone post the link for the $200 discount.. i already searched but i only get the $100 off.. oh... and another thing... do you think it is good to buy the new 12" powerbooks instead of the ibook...?... i will be in the msn, itunes, iwork, safari.. and gaming..

oh.. or should i wait for some time?(can you tell me how much time?)

[Ozmodiar]

Originally posted by Homer S.:
hey, can someone post the link for the $200 discount.. i already searched but i only get the $100 off.. oh... and another thing... do you think it is good to buy the new 12" powerbooks instead of the ibook...?... i will be in the msn, itunes, iwork, safari.. and gaming..

oh.. or should i wait for some time?(can you tell me how much time?)

...

12" $1,499, $1,699 ==> $1,399, $1,499 (with student discount)
15" $1,999, $22,99 ==> $1,799, $2,099
17" $2,699 ==> $2,399

You get $100 or $200 off the 12", $200 off the 15", and $300 off the 17" (all prices in USD).

As for which to get, go with what you need. If you're a light users, get the iBook. If you're a power user, get the PowerBook.

[RonnieoftheRose]

The scrolling touchpad alone makes me want to buy a new model. It's an incredibly simple and well done implementation.

[Pierre B.]

Originally posted by SEkker:

These powerbooks are 15-30% faster than their stock predecessors, and cheaper. What's wrong with that?

Where did you get this from? Going from 1.33 GHz to 1.5 GHz, or from 1.5 GHz to 1.67 GHz looks like 11% or so to me. And in practice this could be below 10%.

[h00ligan]

Originally posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker:
Also where are you getting these prices from? I see a much larger price difference.


In Canadian:
12" iBook $1,249.00
12" Powerbook: 1,899.00 <-still without superdrive.

That is a $600 dif.

that's cuz youa re talking canadian.. the canadian dollar is like monopoly money.

[Simon]

Originally posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO:
Ya, Firewire 800 hasn't caught on at all. Mostly because no devices can do that fast as it is overkill.

Firewire 800 hasn't caught on because of Apple itself only.

They had the incredibly stupid idea to market it as some high-end baloney interface and limit its use to only the most expensive products. And now, well hardly anybody uses the interface on their peripherals because hardly any computer has the ports.

OTOH external SATA will probably become the future standard for highest speed peripheral connections - hell, this is external SATA that didn't even have a standardized connector up to shortly and could have been easily shoved out of the market. Instead Apple chose to develop a technology that will remain unused. In 2 years from now, no manufacturer (not even Apple itself) will ship a computer with external FW800 ports - largely thanks to Apple's stupid market strategy. Apple's marketing should get a big kick in the butt for screwing up the introduction of a perfectly good bus.

What they should have done is include only FW800 ports right away on all new Macs and ship every new Mac with one FW400->FW800 dongle. That way manufacturers would have had a reason to offer FW800 devices. And existing FW400 peripherals would have continued to work just fine.

More information on this topic can be found in this very nice white paper by James Wiebe.

[mrmister]

Agreed--and even with the bump from 4200 to 5400 isn't going to net you a 15% increase...these books are negligibly faster.
They have some nice new features, and the price dropped, which is nice, but they are barely faster.

[runejoha]

This is, just like the one in May, a poor upgrade. We are still waiting for the PB G5, and Apple again releases the same computer in order to keep us waiting. Their PB still work so good for laptop use that it is not necessary to release a heavy power sucking laptop now. The powerbook G5 is now here in the atumn 2005, 1 year after predicted. I think this is because of marketing reasons, not technical.

Originally posted by mrmister:
Agreed--and even with the bump from 4200 to 5400 isn't going to net you a 15% increase...these books are negligibly faster.
They have some nice new features, and the price dropped, which is nice, but they are barely faster.

[Pierre B.]

Now, to all asking about the next update or waiting the mythical G5 Powerbook: first, don't expect the next update before this year's September or November, and second, don't expect a Powerbook with a G5 in this year.

Let me explain, ot rather review, what I have said in this forum in other occasions. On the Freescale side, there is from 2004 already a processor roadmap, with improvements to the G4. Two of them, 7447A/B, with top clock speeds at 1.5 GHz and 1.67 GHz, have already been used. We have now in the menu:

(1) 7448, single e600 core, >1.5 GHz, 1 MB L2 cache with ECC, 200 MHz system bus, less than 10 W power consumption at 1.4 GHz.

(2) 8641D, dual e600 core, >1.5 GHz, 1 MB L2 cache with ECC (per processor core), integrated MPX bus up to 667 MHz (MUCH MUCH faster than the one we have for years in the G4 as a major bottleneck) with dual 64-bit DDR and DDR-II support, PCIe interface.

Availability of the processors: 2H-05 for the 7448 and 1H-06 for the 8641D. It is explained here (page 41).

Now, anyone show me something similar on the IBM side. What? There is nothing? Correct and not surprising, since the G5 comes from a SERVER chip. And what would you prefer in a year from now, a single-core G5 at 1.8-2.0 GHz, with scaled-down features to fit a slim Powerbook, or a dual-core 8641D in the same clock frequency range? And what do you believe Apple would do in view of the upcoming dual-core Dothans?

[Simon]

Pierre, thanks for finally bringing some rationality to the discussion. I 100% agree with your timetable. There will be no IBM PPC9xx in a PowerBook in 2005. None. Zero. Nada.

I predict the 7448 will arrive in six to eight months and the 8641D will find its way into the PowerBook six to eight months later. That puts us well into 2006. By that time maybe IBM has figured out to make a 9xx that takes no more than 15W and can compete with today's 970fx running at 2.5GHz. Maybe not.

If Apple's smart they would market the 7448 as G5 mobile and the 8641D as the Dual G5 mobile. I'm pretty sure good marketing would really help, because the Motorola/Freescale 744x design is long from gone. It will take a lot of time until IBM finds its way to get a 9xx in a 1" PowerBook.

[siflippant]

Originally posted by Eug:
Your TiBook is barely 2 years old.

[Eriamjh]

While I find this speed bump and price cut beneficial, I'm saddened that the G4 (after being out for more than 4 years) has not hit 2GHz (in any form, PB or PM) yet. I guess this is motorola's fault and related to the bus speed limitation.

[villalobos]

Originally posted by mrmister:
Agreed--and even with the bump from 4200 to 5400 isn't going to net you a 15% increase...these books are negligibly faster.
They have some nice new features, and the price dropped, which is nice, but they are barely faster.

The best part is probably the older models at lower prices. On top of that Amazon still has mail-in rebate on these models, WITH the adjusted price. Brings the 12" as low as $1150 and the 15" down to $1500!!!

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by Simon:
Pierre, thanks for finally bringing some rationality to the discussion. I 100% agree with your timetable. There will be no IBM PPC9xx in a PowerBook in 2005. None. Zero. Nada.

I've already put $5 on this: G5 PowerBook in 2005.

Care to take that bet too?

If Apple's smart they would market the 7448 as G5 mobile and the 8641D as the Dual G5 mobile. I'm pretty sure good marketing would really help, because the Motorola/Freescale 744x design is long from gone. It will take a lot of time until IBM finds its way to get a 9xx in a 1" PowerBook.

Except that the G5 is 64-bit, and the 7448 and (other) e600s are not. At best, the 7448 should be simply called a G4, and the 8641D a dual G4 Extreme!!!11 or something.

[jorgem4]

Originally posted by RonnieoftheRose:
The scrolling touchpad alone makes me want to buy a new model. It's an incredibly simple and well done implementation.

Dude...just get sidetrack at versiontracker.com it works great! I love it. And you don't have to buy a new PB!

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Actually these powebooks do sound rather pathetic considering 9 months later it is just 15% faster.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker:
Actually these powebooks do sound rather pathetic considering 9 months later it is just 15% faster.

Well, overall they're still a reasonable value, since they dropped prices too.

[wilsonng]

A poor upgrade is a relative term.

I remember having to pay $1600 for an iBook G3 600 Mhz way back then. Now for the same price, I can get a nice PB G4 12" 1.5 Ghz.

It is a poor upgrade for folks who have a Rev C PB but for someone who has an older PB, it is a worthy upgrade.

Originally posted by runejoha:
This is, just like the one in May, a poor upgrade. We are still waiting for the PB G5, and Apple again releases the same computer in order to keep us waiting. Their PB still work so good for laptop use that it is not necessary to release a heavy power sucking laptop now. The powerbook G5 is now here in the atumn 2005, 1 year after predicted. I think this is because of marketing reasons, not technical.

[Simon]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
I've already put $5 on this: G5 PowerBook in 2005.
Care to take that bet too?

I'll double that. No problem. Again: there will be no IBM PPC 9xx in the PowerBook in 2005.

Except that the G5 is 64-bit, and the 7448 and (other) e600s are not.

64 bit doesn't mean didly squat to 95% of the consumers. Show me one that uses a 64 bit pointer. Scientific computing? Yep. The rest of the world: nope.

If Apple calls a dual-core 8641D PowerBook running a 667 MHz bus 'PowerBook G4' that's just plain and simple incompetent marketing.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by Simon:
I'll double that. No problem. Again: there will be no IBM PPC 9xx in the PowerBook in 2005.

Excellent.

64 bit doesn't mean didly squat to 95% of the consumers. Show me one that uses a 64 bit pointer. Scientific computing? Yep. The rest of the world: nope.

If Apple calls a dual-core 8641D PowerBook 'G4' that's just incompetent marketing.

And if they call it a G5, the world will simply say "Bullsh!t!".

[Simon]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
And if they call it a G5, the world will simply say bullsh!t.

No. You'd say bs. But, fortunately for Apple, the world consists of a couple more people...

[SEkker]

A dual core G4 will still likely let Steve J call these new powerbooks the 'fastest notebooks on the planet'. How he sells the G4 vs G5 origin, etc., is something else entirely.

Either way, it will be nice to see the next gen of Apple laptops. Maybe they'll be in 2005, maybe it's really early 2006. Either way, they will be better than any comparable windows laptops.

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by RonnieoftheRose:
The scrolling touchpad alone makes me want to buy a new model. It's an incredibly simple and well done implementation.

Try Sidetrack.

I've been using it for a little while now, and it's great. It's shareware, so you can try it for free. And it's a heck of a lot cheaper than a new computer.

[Phossil]

Anyone see a possability for another update by August? I need a powerbook but I really don't want to spend my $$ on these underpowered books, the fact of the matter is I could get an AMD based x86 notebook and load Linux or FreeBSD on it for much less and have much better computing power (and 64 bit at that). I love OSX so I would really like to get it on my new comp. I'll be leaving for college in August and I would really like to leave with a dual G4.

So anyone see possible updates by August?

[MilkmanDan]

If someone hasn't said it before, I'll say it now, whats with BT 2.0? Wure its cool and all. But does anything use it?

[fisherKing]

Originally posted by MilkmanDan:
If someone hasn't said it before, I'll say it now, whats with BT 2.0? Wure its cool and all. But does anything use it?

i remember way back in the 20th century, when apple moved to usb ports.
there was an incredible uproar.

nothing existed for it, all our periphs needed serial ports...

this is like going to usb2, or firewire 800...a good step forward.

since bt2 is backward compatible, my mouse & palm will be fine.
then, when some new palms, or phones, or whatever, come out,
apple users will be the first ones to use them.


(or, the spec will die and no one will care... )

[cobra27]

If the PB upgrades carry on at this rate for the next 2 years, I think my next "upgrade" from PB 12" revB will be an iBook with the exact same specs as today's PB revD or even revE.

[jamil5454]

If Apple ever calls a 32-bit chip a G5 I will explode.

I remember when I used to be a PC enthusiast and Apple first released the G5. Even though it had no real use, everyone was hyping about how the G5 was 64-bit. And then AMD released the Athlon64.

I'm not sure about anyone else, but it would nice to be able to do 64-bit development on the road. And not have to worry about crashes. And breakage. And spyware. And hardware-software incompatabilities.

In other words, I want a 64-bit PowerBook. I don't care which chip it has in it. Oh yeah, and 64-bit processors definitely have a speed advantage over 32-bit processors, especially when it comes to multimedia applications and other heavily math-driven programs. Processing 64-bit will take one clock cycle on a 64-bit processor, as opposed to two cycles on a 32-bit. POVRAY is a great example of this. When compiled with 64-bit support, POVRAY gets huge performance increases, as will any rendering application. Also, the quality of the produced image increases due to the higher precision.

When the whole computing industry is moving to 64-bit why would Apple want to take a step backwards and call a 32-bit processor a G5?

[chrisutley]

Who remembers the great GeoPort!!!??? Best flop port of all time... Lucky for us Apple has landed more hits than misses.

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

This release must me the most unenthusiastic powerbook in years.

[Simon]

Does anybody here understand Apple's reasoning when it comes to the price of these new PowerBooks? I mean, it's nice they lowered the prices across the line, but it looks like the 17" no longer carries a premium, OTOH the 15" is a lot more expensive than the 12". Here's what I noticed:

15"-1.67GHz-1GB-80GB-SD-64MB $2449
17"-1.67GHz-1GB-80GB-SD-64MB $2749

but

12"-1.5GHz-768MB-80GB-SD-64MB $1774
15"-1.5GHz-1GB-80GB-SD-64MB $2299

So, from 15" to 17" there's a 12% price increase, but to go from 12" to 15" means a 30% price increase!

Normally, top of the line means premium price and price differences get smaller the lower down the line you go (in order to get people to buy something better than the lowest model). Now, Apple PowerBook prices make it actually more tempting to get a 12" than a 15" on one hand, but also the 17" carries hardly any premium. What's the deal?

[Richyfp]

Just a little note on how much the PBs have improved since September 2003, when I bought my 15" model:

1.25 GHz ---> 1.67 GHz
512Mb RAM ---> 512Mb RAM
Radeon Mobility 9600 (64Mb) ---> Radeon Mobility 9700 (64Mb)
80 Gb 4200rpm ---> 80Gb 5400 rpm (with sudden motion sensor)
1x DVD-R/CD-RW ---> 8x DVD�RW/CD-RW
Bluetooth ---> Bluetooth 2.0+EDR
Trackpad ---> Scrolling trackpad
�1719 ---> �1532 (Both education price with AppleCare Protection Plan)

BTO options have increased to include a 100Gb hard drive and a Radeon with dual-link DVI ability. ALternatively, if I configure a PB today to cost the same as my current one, I get this:

1.67 GHz, 1Gb RAM, Radeon Mobility (128 Mb), 100 Gb 5400 rpm disk, all for about �14 more than I paid in 2003... 400 MHz extra clock-speed, double the RAM, double the VRAM on a better card, 25% more disk space and all the other little enhancements like the Bluetooth and scrolling trackpad. Not a bad deal...

[MORT A POTTY]

Originally posted by Richyfp:
Just a little note on how much the PBs have improved since September 2003, when I bought my 15" model:

1.25 GHz ---> 1.67 GHz
512Mb RAM ---> 512Mb RAM
Radeon Mobility 9600 (64Mb) ---> Radeon Mobility 9700 (64Mb)
80 Gb 4200rpm ---> 80Gb 5400 rpm (with sudden motion sensor)
1x DVD-R/CD-RW ---> 8x DVD�RW/CD-RW
Bluetooth ---> Bluetooth 2.0+EDR
Trackpad ---> Scrolling trackpad
�1719 ---> �1532 (Both education price with AppleCare Protection Plan)

BTO options have increased to include a 100Gb hard drive and a Radeon with dual-link DVI ability. ALternatively, if I configure a PB today to cost the same as my current one, I get this:

1.67 GHz, 1Gb RAM, Radeon Mobility (128 Mb), 100 Gb 5400 rpm disk, all for about �14 more than I paid in 2003... 400 MHz extra clock-speed, double the RAM, double the VRAM on a better card, 25% more disk space and all the other little enhancements like the Bluetooth and scrolling trackpad. Not a bad deal...

yeah, but a year and a third later... this ain't great.

[Voch]

Originally posted by Simon:
Now, Apple PowerBook prices make it actually more tempting to get a 12" than a 15" on one hand, but also the 17" carries hardly any premium. What's the deal?

Let's see if I forget anything.

12"-to-15" adds the bigger LCD, larger HD, Firewire 800 port, Gigabit ethernet, PC card slot, extra RAM socket, backlit keyboard, better video chip, integrated S-Video port (no adapter needed) and dual-link DVI (available).

15"-to-17" adds a bigger LCD, bigger HD, and dual-link DVI.

Originally posted by MORT A POTTY:
yeah, but a year and a third later... this ain't great.

Agreed. Still chuggin' with my 667...

Voch

[cc_foo]

If I bring a PowerBook to work. And someone else also happens to bring a PowerBook to work. And both machines are not configured for any networks (e.g as there are no networks around)...

In this situation, if I want to transfer a file from one machine to another, then I could
1. use a USB thumbdrive, or USB card reader, or USB/FW harddisk;

2. create an airport network, configure IP addresses, or Appletalk, start file sharing, and then copy the file(s) over

3. do the above, then start iChat, Rendezvous or whatever, and then copy files over...

4. Burn a CDR/DVD

5. I could start up BlueTooth file exchange, select a file, and then select the other dude's PowerBook, and then copy the file over.

6. Boot one PowerBook into Firewire disk mode, and use a FW cable between the machines.

7. Rig up FW networking with a FW cable.

In the few cases that this has happened to me, options 1 and 5 has been the most reliable. But for files larger than an available USB thumbdrive, option 5 is the way to go.

So if Bluetooth 2.0 is 3x faster than 1.1... hey, that's a good thing.

[John123]

Originally posted by Simon:
Does anybody here understand Apple's reasoning when it comes to the price of these new PowerBooks? I mean, it's nice they lowered the prices across the line, but it looks like the 17" no longer carries a premium, OTOH the 15" is a lot more expensive than the 12". Here's what I noticed:

15"-1.67GHz-1GB-80GB-SD-64MB $2449
17"-1.67GHz-1GB-80GB-SD-64MB $2749

but

12"-1.5GHz-768MB-80GB-SD-64MB $1774
15"-1.5GHz-1GB-80GB-SD-64MB $2299

So, from 15" to 17" there's a 12% price increase, but to go from 12" to 15" means a 30% price increase!

Normally, top of the line means premium price and price differences get smaller the lower down the line you go (in order to get people to buy something better than the lowest model). Now, Apple PowerBook prices make it actually more tempting to get a 12" than a 15" on one hand, but also the 17" carries hardly any premium. What's the deal?

I'm not at all sure why you tricked these out with 1GB of RAM to make your price comparisons. Your 12" to 15" comparison makes that one inherently misleading as you put 768MB in the 12" and 1GB in the 15". Despite the fact that that is a 512MB "upgrade" for both machines, it skews your comparisons.

You cannot look at comparisons in percentage terms. A percentage is a difference divided by a baseline price. As a result, cost differences between computer models will often have decreasing percentages as you go up in price. Consider that the PowerBook G4 15" Combo costs $1999 and the little 12" iBook costs $999. That's therefore a 100% price increase! Percentage terms aren't the way to look at this stuff...absolute price differences are.

500 bucks gets you from a 12" PB to a 15" PB. 400 bucks takes you the next step up in screen size. There are some feature enhancements with each of these, but that's essentially the gig. It's not that different from previous PB lineups.

[runejoha]

I thought Apple was going to release the G5 PB way before now, but it seems like their customers forgive slow CPUs in their products because they work
more than enough anyway. For Apple it is important to release computers
which have long battery lifetime, not to much weight, slim etc. The G5
seems to be a problem for them. This delay, just like the one in May,
"confirms" that they need to delay the PB G5 release because of either
marketing issues or technical problems. Remeber that Jobs said in a spanish newspaper that it was going to be released in q4 2004? They have som
unexcepted problems in some way, or some marketing reasons.

I think the PB G5 will be THE big news from Apple after iPod, with liquid cooling and maybe battery on metanol. It should be here sooner than later though. After all Apple is not alone on the market, and they have to realise that the AMD 64 on new slim laptops will make the PB G5 not as exiting if they wait to long.

Originally posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker:
This release must me the most unenthusiastic powerbook in years.

[Simon]

Originally posted by John123:
I'm not at all sure why you tricked these out with 1GB of RAM to make your price comparisons.

I chose the specs for the PowerBook I'd buy myself. Baseline 512 MB doesn't cut it. I should have mentioned that in my original post. I didn't spec the machines to skew the results, I just spec'ed them to the config I want to buy.

Your 12" to 15" comparison makes that one inherently misleading as you put 768MB in the 12" and 1GB in the 15". Despite the fact that that is a 512MB "upgrade" for both machines, it skews your comparisons.

No, it's the right comparison from the buyer's point of view. I want to upgrade above 512 MB RAM. It doesn't have to be 1 GB, but it has to be at least 768 MB. That means the cheapest upgrade on the 15" takes me to 1GB, and the cheapest upgrade on the 12" takes me to 768 MB. Of course that's not identical, but it's what the buyer (in this case that's me) would order. And to be perfectly honest with you: the 256 MB difference doesn't even come close to justifying part of the $525 difference between my 12" and my 15" example config.

You cannot look at comparisons in percentage terms. A percentage is a difference divided by a baseline price.

That comment is kind of funny, because I actually mastered in math, so I know pretty well what a percentage is. But I understand your objection. Problem is, it looks even worse in absolute numbers:
12" -> 15" is $525
15"->17" is $300
It still doesn't make a lot of sense to me. In both comparisons the advance in no. of pixels is similar, the CPUs are identical, the HDs as well. The 12"->15" gives basically the second DIMM slot, Gigabit Ethernet, backlit KB, PC card slot, FW800, and 9700 Mobility which can't be matched on the 15"->17" upgrade. And those are supposedly worth $225? Hmm. Maybe if you rely on them all...

Basically, I guess I'm asking why the 17" carries such a low premium over the 15". It's as if Apple wants to keep people from buying the 15" and divert sales to the 12" or 17".

Anyway, just to make sure we don't misunderstand each other, let me say that I really like these PowerBooks and I really think they carry nice price tags, it's just that I don't understand how Apple justifies that it costs almost double to go from a 12" to a 15" than going from a 15" to a 17".

[runejoha]

>>it's just that I don't understand how Apple justifies that it costs almost double to go from a 12" to a 15" than going from a 15" to a 17".

Monopoly. They can do pretty much they want to in order to maximize profit as long they are the only one on the SW and HW mac platform. This is one of the disadvantages of Apple. The difference in HW between a 12'' and a 15'' is minimal, but not the value for the end-user, and Apple charge you more. If they had been in competition with other companies, they would have cut the price in order to gain more customers.

Originally posted by Simon:
I chose the specs for the PowerBook I'd buy myself. Baseline 512 MB doesn't cut it. I should have mentioned that in my original post. I didn't spec the machines to skew the results, I just spec'ed them to the config I want to buy.



No, it's the right comparison from the buyer's point of view. I want to upgrade above 512 MB RAM. It doesn't have to be 1 GB, but it has to be at least 768 MB. That means the cheapest upgrade on the 15" takes me to 1GB, and the cheapest upgrade on the 12" takes me to 768 MB. Of course that's not identical, but it's what the buyer (in this case that's me) would order. And to be perfectly honest with you: the 256 MB difference doesn't even come close to justifying part of the $525 difference between my 12" and my 15" example config.



That comment is kind of funny, because I actually mastered in math, so I know pretty well what a percentage is. But I understand your objection. Problem is, it looks even worse in absolute terms:
12" -> 15" is $525
15"->17" is $300
It still doesn't make a lot of sense to me. The advance in no. of pixels is similar for both pairs, the CPUs are identical, the HDs as well. The 12"->15" gives basically the second DIMM slot, backlit KB, PC card slot, FW800, and 9700 Mobility which can't be matched on the 15"->17" upgrade. And those four are supposedly worth $225? Hmm.

And just to make sure we don't misunderstand each other, let me say that I really like these PowerBooks and I really think they carry nice price tags, it's just that I don't understand how Apple justifies that it costs almost double to go from a 12" to a 15" than going from a 15" to a 17".

[John123]

Originally posted by Simon:
I chose the specs for the PowerBook I'd buy myself. Baseline 512 MB doesn't cut it. I should have mentioned that in my original post. I didn't spec the machines to skew the results, I just spec'ed them to the config I want to buy.

...

No, it's the right comparison from the buyer's point of view. I want to upgrade above 512 MB RAM. It doesn't have to be 1 GB, but it has to be at least 768 MB.

Okay, but you should be clear that that's from YOUR point of view and not that of all buyers. I have 768MB on my current iBook/1.2Ghz and HATE it. I miss having 1GB like I did on my TiBook/1Ghz.

And to be perfectly honest with you: the 256 MB difference doesn't even come close to justifying part of the $525 difference between my 12" and my 15" example config.

I wasn't arguing that it does. Just that it is a factor that you should weigh to the tune of roughly $100 (or $150 in Apple retail terms).

That comment is kind of funny, because I actually mastered in math, so I know pretty well what a percentage is. But I understand your objection. Problem is, it looks even worse in absolute numbers:
12" -> 15" is $525
15"->17" is $300

Mmmkay, don't get in a tizzy please. You majored in math, I do math for a living, but there are lots of mathophobes here, so my discussion was as much for their benefit as anyone's.

$500 gets you (to add a little bit to your feature list) 12" to 15", Backlit keyboard, a much better graphics card, 20GB more HD, your RAM on one chip rather than two, Firewire 800, Gigabit ethernet, the PC card, and full DVI and S-Video out. I think that's eminently reasonable. It's also a pretty big feature jump -- more so than the 15" to the 17", frankly. Maybe what you really are arguing (even though you're not) is that the 17" could have an ever larger premium. Yeah, maybe. But it has been a LONG time since an Apple portable was replaced with a newer model that had a LARGER price than its predecessor. I for one find that to be a great thing, and I suspect most everyone will agree with me there.

You are ABSOLUTELY right that the 15" to the 17" upgrade doesn't have as many features...and that jump costs less. You get the screen size, the larger hard drive (worth $100), the more onboard VRAM (worth $100), the digital audio, and the dual link DVI, all for $400. Again, eminently reasonable.

I think it's just all about what you value. Sounds like you don't value the jump to the 15" for that $500 price tag, so maybe the 12" is more the computer for you.

[Simon]

Originally posted by John123:
20GB more HD

Um, no. If you'd go back and read my original comparison, you'll see I purposely downgraded the 17's HDD to match the 15" PowerBook's 80GB drive.

Maybe what you really are arguing (even though you're not) is that the 17" could have an ever larger premium.

Of course I'm arguing that. If you'd go back and read my post, you will notice that I said:

Basically, I guess I'm asking why the 17" carries such a low premium over the 15".

Sounds like you don't value the jump to the 15" for that $500 price tag, so maybe the 12" is more the computer for you.

No, I don't value the $500 jump. I could care less about the PC Card slot, the S-Video, the backlit keyboard, and the other toys, but I want the raw CPU and GPU power of the 15" - so I'll end up with the 15" I guess. Unfortunately Apple believes that those people who want ultra-portable notebooks also want weaker notebooks. Of course we all know that's baloney, but it's been Apple's policy from day one on to cripple the 12".

Anyway, to give this a more positive spin, let me put it this way: 12" PowerBook buyers are getting their Mac at a very good price.

[Commodus]

One theory could be that Apple just wants to keep the price down on their least expensive PowerBooks, to help lure people in (both Windows users and Mac users who want a laptop more full-featured than the iBook). They may not have felt that they would get the same result with the 15" PowerBook.

[John123]

Originally posted by Simon:
Um, no. If you'd go back and read my original comparison, you'll see I purposely downgraded the 17's HDD to match the 15" PowerBook's 80GB drive.



Of course I'm arguing that. If you'd go back and read my post, you will notice that I said:





No, I don't value the $500 jump. I could care less about the PC Card slot, the S-Video, the backlit keyboard, and the other toys, but I want the raw CPU and GPU power of the 15" - so I'll end up with the 15" I guess. Unfortunately Apple believes that those people who want ultra-portable notebooks also want weaker notebooks. Of course we all know that's baloney, but it's been Apple's policy from day one on to cripple the 12".

Anyway, to give this a more positive spin, let me put it this way: 12" PowerBook buyers are getting their Mac at a very good price.

Dude, I don't know what's with the attitude. Maybe you just don't like it when people disagree with you, but there's no reason to be snippy.

You and I are using two different baselines. You're customizing machines, and I'm talking about standard configurations (since that is what a majority of Mac users buy, even if they do upgrade something like RAM via a third party vendor).

Using the standard configurations, it's a $500 price jump from the 12" to the 15" (combo drives), and it's a $400 price jump from the 15" to the 17" (Superdrives).

It's not that the 17" carries a low premium. It's that you've already paid for all the good junk to *GET* to the 15". Apple KNOWS that a lot of users are not going to buy the 17" because it is just too honkin' big (a decision I made for myself tonight after a visit to my local Apple store to decide for sure that I want a 15" and not a 17"). It would be thus foolish for them to strip down the 15" to a mid-level configuration because that might cost them sales. In fact, I'll even say that I am surprised that the 17" base configuration comes with features that the 15" higher base configuration does not. Attentive Apple followers will recall that in the last iteration of PowerBooks, that was not the case: while the 15" and the 17" were separated by $300 in price, it was the screen size ALONE that set the 17" apart. Otherwise, the two models shared the same processor, video card, video RAM, standard RAM, hard drive, and optical drives.

In any event, instead of spouting the conspiracy theory that Apple has crippled the 12", you might take a moment to sit back and wonder why they make the decisions to do, and consider that some of it might just have to do with architecture and fitting a lot of stuff in the same space. I have a 12" iBook, and I assure you -- there ain't no more room for more ports.

[shabbasuraj]

No BTO screens yet.

sux.

Apple please give us BTO screens in the upcoming G5 PB.

[siflippant]

Originally posted by John123:
Dude, I don't know what's with the attitude. Maybe you just don't like it when people disagree with you, but there's no reason to be snippy.

[Simon]

Originally posted by John123:
Dude, I don't know what's with the attitude. Maybe you just don't like it when people disagree with you, but there's no reason to be snippy.

Where do you gather the impression that I'm snippy because of some disagreement with you? I'm not really disagreeing with you, it's just that you haven't addressed my question yet. That's ok, you don't have to, but I'm still trying to get an answer from somebody. Perhaps you're being a little thin-skinned here?

I don't mind the fact that you would compare differently or just look at baselines, etc. The reason for the customizing and why I chose these configurations is because that's what I want to buy. I'm not suggesting this has to be the same for anybody else, or that there is some special value in this comparison - it's just the comparison I have to make. It would be rather stupid if I would just compare baseline prices, when I know for certain, that's not what I'm going to buy.

In any event, instead of spouting the conspiracy theory that Apple has crippled the 12", you might take a moment to sit back and wonder why they make the decisions to do, and consider that some of it might just have to do with architecture and fitting a lot of stuff in the same space.

I was afraid somebody would say that. Last time we discussed this, the 12" had a 1.0 GHz 7447 and some people were frenetic about how it would have been completely impossible to put a 1.33 GHz 7447A in the 12" case. Well, six months later when the 15" went up to 1.5 GHz, we got the 1.33 GHz in the 12". And now with the 7447B we're even at 1.5 GHz on the 12". And again, there are actually people who want to make us believe the 12" can't take any more than a 1.5 GHz 7447B.

Sorry, but I won't buy that. Apple has always managed to put the 15" CPU/bus speed specs in the next revision of the 12". And let's remember that this has happened with the same 7447 CPU. The 867 MHz 12" went to 1 GHz eight months after the 15". The 1GHz, 133 MHz bus 12" went to 1.33 GHz and 167 MHz bus six months after the 17". It's not technical limitations that lead to the crippling, it's marketing reasons that keep the 12" under-featured.

I think we should end this discussion before the thread dies off irrelevance. My original question has been answered pretty well by Commodus:

Originally posted by Commodus:
One theory could be that Apple just wants to keep the price down on their least expensive PowerBooks, to help lure people in (both Windows users and Mac users who want a laptop more full-featured than the iBook). They may not have felt that they would get the same result with the 15" PowerBook.

Thanks for the hint Commodus. I guess that makes quite some sense.

[John123]

[asmujica]

It would be interesting if third party developers where allowed to make g5 laptops. How long till someone sues apple to be able to do it?

[Simon]

Originally posted by asmujica:
It would be interesting if third party developers where allowed to make g5 laptops.

I guess it's not so much a problem that Apple just doesn't want to put a G5 in a PowerBook; it's more a problem of wattage. There is no G5 currently available that consumes something around 20W and at the same time performs better than available G4s. Unless users want a PowerBook that has a battery lifetime of around 30 min and is two inches thick (giving room for iMac-style cooling fans), Apple can't put the available 970fx in anything like a PowerBook.

[tswan]

are just that...fantasies. Apple doesn't always put every desktop chip into a laptop and in this case that's probably a good thing. Otherwise all these posts would be about how stupid Apple was to release a laptop that had its fans going full blast all the time and about starting a class action lawsuit to replace all of the pants that had spontaneously combusted.

Frankly the current G4 laptops are fine for most users and represent one of the best values in Apple's professional portable line ever. All of the pining for greater speed/64-bit/G5 seems to be just craving for cravings sake and just ain't likely to happen anytime soon.