Powerbooks? iBooks?

[arn]

MacOS Rumors (http://www.macosrumors.com/) updated with a new rumor on possible PowerBook and iBook upgrades later this year:

Apple's Titanium PowerBook is in for a change at Mac World New York. It will not be getting a case changing, but many other things will change

Upgrades include 1536x1024 rez, larger drives, batteries, and increased bus speed to 133MHz as well as processor bumps.

Their "source" also hints at faster G3 iBooks as well as 14" across the line.

[Unregistered]

did you mean faster G3 iBooks?

[arn]

Originally posted by Unregistered
did you mean faster G3 iBooks?

yep... it was a typo.

arn

[BeerDrinker29]

Nothing really new there, except for that screen resolution. The iBook line moving to 14 inch screens has been around for awhile. I hope it's not true..

[kishba]

Originally posted by BeerDrinker29
Nothing really new there, except for that screen resolution. The iBook line moving to 14 inch screens has been around for awhile. I hope it's not true..

noooooo the ibook needs to keep a 12 inch screen! it should continue to be a full featured "sub" notebook

[digitalrampage]

I work in an Apple reseller, and the 14 inch iBooks are not that incredibly popular.

The best feature about the 12 inch iBook is its size... thats a major selling point to children, students etc...

To go 14 inch across the line would be stupid! A higher res on the top of the line would be good, but ditching the 12 inch would certainly reduce sales...

:eek:

So dont say DieBook... the 12 inch has to stay, in at least a combo format.

[OSeXy!]

Ever since the iBook was introduced, I thought the margin around the edge of the screen looked quite large (compared to the TiBook). I always thought apple might replace it with a 13-incher when prices fell on LCDs. This would give it the virtue of a larger screen, while keeping the same tiny footprint. If they can do that, I'd dump the 14-inch from the line...

[arn]

Originally posted by digitalrampage
I work in an Apple reseller, and the 14 inch iBooks are not that incredibly popular.

The best feature about the 12 inch iBook is its size... thats a major selling point to children, students etc...


and to adults :)

I agree... I love the small-size of the iBook... in fact, I wouldn't mind if Apple tried to make smaller portable even....

arn

[clonenode]

All of the tooling is made and in place for the 14" iBook to stay, but it IS interesting to consider the possibility of a larger screen in the smaller iBook. At the current (smaller) size, the iBook is incredibly popular and powerful. I can't see them phasing it out unless it is to be replaced by some kind of keyboardless, touchscreen tablet style portable.


c l o n e n o d e
o n e o f m a n y

[imspace2]

I really like the size and portability of the 12in model lot easier to fit in a backpack or something I think they should keep both models available. The new 14 looks kind of empty anyway when you open it up around the palm rests and such.

[grrr223]

Keep the 12 inch ibooks! Cost alone is one reason. You can get a 500mhz 12 inch iBook for what $1,000 or $1,100 these days, but it's about $1,800 to buy the 14 inch one. Yes I realize it's 600 mhz, but there are a lot of people (like me) who just couldn't afford the 14 inch one but would buy the $1,000 ibook in a heartbeat if I had the money.

[Unregistered]

Here's my thoughts -

When Apple first came out with the 12in iBook, I loved everything about it except that tiny screen you had to squint at.

I thought the 14in screen prefected the model. Before, I was considering a Pismo or Lombard - simply because of the screen. Now I'm looking at the 14in iBook.

I do agree though that it is a bit pricey.

[dongmin]

Orignally I thought it was a good way to round out the product line. But now, after seeing it in person, I don't like it at all. The extra size doesn't add anything to the iBook other than larger screen (at the same resolution). They didn't do anything with the extra space around the palm rest and keyboard. It would've been nice if they added bigger speakers or more F keys or a PC card slot. But nil. It just looks like a bloated iBook. Bad design. Bad Apple.

[cleo]

I'm planning on buying an iBook this summer. Ideally (although I'm not sure if it's realistic) I'd much rather see a G4 12-inch than have to buy a G3 14-inch. The small footprint is what makes the iBook so unique, in my opinion. Better to make it more snappy than more bulky. Just my $.02!

[alex_ant]

I want 1152x864 or 1280x1024 in the iBooks. If the iBook had a 12" 1152x864 screen, I would have bought that instead of the PB G4 550. 1024x768 is just too low for me, and I would imagine it's too low for a lot of people, especially those who use OS X and have 8 web browser windows, a word processor, an MP3 player, numerous Finder windows, etc. all open at the same time. (1152x768 is too low for me also, but there's not much I can do besides get used to it.)

If there were an 1152x864 or 1280x1024 12" iBook, I would swap my PowerBook for it in a heartbeat. Oh, how I wish...

1536x1024 would be fantastic for the PowerBooks, and much needed. As it is, whenever I have to do anything more than light web browsing or word processing, I *have* to hook up a 1600x1200 monitor because 1152x768 is just not enough. IMO, the PBG4's low resolution is one of its only drawbacks.

For the PBG4, how about AirPort antennae mounted on the top/sides of the screen?

Alex

[Xapplimatic]

Upgrades include 1536x1024 rez, larger drives, batteries, and increased bus speed to 133MHz as well as processor bumps...

The PowerBook system bus is already @ 133 MHz as of the last speed bump (on the higher model). What they meant for those who don't bother to read the original article was that even the lower model PowerBooks will now also have 133 MHz bus speed making it standard across the board.

Hopefully they will standardise the iBook line in the same way dropping the 66 Mhz bus from the lower models. Probably they won't do that until they've used up their stockpile of 66 MHz iBook motherboards (just a guess).

[mac15]

14inch screen not a good idea
people like the smallness of the ibook
why change something that already good

[rekras]

I wonder if Apple will upgrade the ibook to a G4, canceling out the G3 across the product lineup. I think they'll do this sometime late next year when G5s are available for powerbooks. The G4 in the ibook would most likely come with a new design, although it's hard to imagine an ibook with a better design than the current model...

[AlphaTech]

I have a question for everyone wishing for higher resolutions in the laptops... Have you actually thought about what that will do to everything on the screen??? At 1152x768 in the TiBook, everything is sized just right. Especially with you being able to adjust the size of the desktop icons. While I can understand some people wanting a bit higher numbers, anything approaching 1536x1024 or 1600x1200 on the 15.2" screen is going to be TINY! I can't imagine putting either of those onto either the 12" or 14" iBook.

What size screen are you using with the 1600x1200 resolution, a 21"? Unless you have ungodly, or bionic, eyes, the higher resolutions are going to be a strain (on the built in displays).

Having the resolutions available for external screens does make sense, but not onto the built in lcd.

Any rebuttals??

[cmoney]

Originally posted by AlphaTech
I have a question for everyone wishing for higher resolutions in the laptops... Have you actually thought about what that will do to everything on the screen??? At 1152x768 in the TiBook, everything is sized just right. Especially with you being able to adjust the size of the desktop icons. While I can understand some people wanting a bit higher numbers, anything approaching 1536x1024 or 1600x1200 on the 15.2" screen is going to be TINY! I can't imagine putting either of those onto either the 12" or 14" iBook.

What size screen are you using with the 1600x1200 resolution, a 21"? Unless you have ungodly, or bionic, eyes, the higher resolutions are going to be a strain (on the built in displays).

Having the resolutions available for external screens does make sense, but not onto the built in lcd.

Any rebuttals??

I agree, getting 1536x1024 on a 15.2" screen would make things unreadable...until the day that OS X is resolution independent. Then you can use the higher resolution for better anti-aliasing. Until that day, I think the if they took the DPI of the 12" iBook and put it on the 15.2" LCD in the PBG4, it would give more usable space for OS X. (Though with some people complaining about the DPI on the iBook, combined with the fact that the typical PBG4 user is older than the average iBook user (and thus may have worse eyes), maybe Apple realized this and kept the PBG4 with a lower res.)

And is it just me or does OS X just use up lots of space? I'm running 1600x1200 on my 19" CRT and it seems just like 1280x1024 under OS 9. Apps like Finder use larger fonts with no way to change it so the higher resolution gives relatively the same size characters but with higher DPI. I think with OS X as the default. there is a need to have higher resolutions now.

[Unregistered]

Originally posted by AlphaTech
I have a question for everyone wishing for higher resolutions in the laptops... Have you actually thought about what that will do to everything on the screen??? At 1152x768 in the TiBook, everything is sized just right. Especially with you being able to adjust the size of the desktop icons. While I can understand some people wanting a bit higher numbers, anything approaching 1536x1024 or 1600x1200 on the 15.2" screen is going to be TINY! I can't imagine putting either of those onto either the 12" or 14" iBook.

What size screen are you using with the 1600x1200 resolution, a 21"? Unless you have ungodly, or bionic, eyes, the higher resolutions are going to be a strain (on the built in displays).

Having the resolutions available for external screens does make sense, but not onto the built in lcd.

Any rebuttals??

If by "everything is sized just right" you mean "everything is sized just right for my half-blind grandmother to see through her 14-ounce bifocals," then yes, everything is sized just right. As it is now, I can see the individual pixels and their black outlines (albeit barely) on my TiBook from 2 feet away, and I don't think I have ungodly/bionic eyes. Actually, I'm terribly nearsighted and wear glasses.

I don't think 1600x1200 on an iBook is a good idea. Actually, I think it's a very bad idea. I <i>do</i> however think 1536x1024 on a PowerBook is a good idea. The PowerBook is Apple's professional portable. It's a portable workstation (well, it would be if OS X weren't so butt slow, but that's another discussion). Apps like FCP, Photoshop, etc. would be SO MUCH more pleasant to use in 1536x1024 than 1152x768 it's not even funny.

Mac OS X takes up a lot more space than OS 9 does/did - all the finder windows/fonts are bigger, and then there's the dock, which shaves off a good portion of the screen even when it's made small. I am running my PowerBook at 1600x1200 on a 19" monitor at the moment, and it's very nice in OS X. In OS 9 though, yes, I would have to squint.

Now, would 1536x1024 on an LCD be okay? I think so. Even though the screen is smaller, I think people would tend to be closer to it while using it. Also, LCDs are very sharp - small text may be small, but it's not blurry. If the text in your web browser or whatever is too small, well, that's what the font size preferences are there for. :)

Nobody is calling for 1600x1200 on the PowerBook's screen. That resolution is not the same aspect ratio as the screen, so things would appear vertically squashed. I think 1536x1024 = perfect. Even that is less than some comparable PC laptops - but it's still perfect, I think.

The PowerBook can do 1920x1440 to an external display. I definitely don't think anything like THAT is suitable for the LCD. :)

1536x1024 for the PowerBook...
1280x1024 for the 14.1" iBook...
and 1152x864 for the 12.1" iBook.
Perfection! :)

One more thing to consider - and this is not meant to be an insult of any kind - you may want to consider an eye exam if you haven't had one recently. Your eyes' strengths and correction requirements can and often do change very slowly over time without you noticing. Again, not to call you blind as a bat or anything, but it's something to think about. :)

Alex

[AlphaTech]

well 'Unregistered' if that really is your name... get the asbestos shorts on cause here come da flames...

One. I already wear glasses, and everything on my TiBook's screen is crystal clear. I have no problem seeing the tv at over 10' away, nor the 19" screen on my desktop that is a little further.

You can adjust the dock, and you don't have to put all that much in it if you don't want to. I have mine set to between 1/4" and 3/8" tall when not being accessed. I have also set the icon size smaller then default (yes, you can do this too). I do with that they would make the grid size match closer to the icon size (so that things get closer as you make them smaller). Smaller font selections would be helpful, but that is a minor point (and probably will be addressed at a later release/update). MAYBE a 1280x resolution would work for the TiBook, but I think you are delusional if you think anything larger will be comfortable.

I have several users at work that have a hard time with 1024x768 on 14" PowerBook G3 systems (no one on an iMac use anything higher then 800x600 even when 1024x768 is available).

As far as "Apps like FCP, Photoshop, etc. would be SO MUCH more pleasant to use in 1536x1024 than 1152x768 it's not even funny" goes... Maybe in your world, but not in the real one.

No matter how sharp lcd screens are, that tight of a resolution would be friggin tiny. Unless they tighten up the dpi rating of the lcd screens (not likely in the near future) applications will not benefit from the higher resolutions. If anything, it will make them harder to use. Yes, you would be able to fit more tool windows on the screen, but then your document size would not correlate to the real world. How many people expect 1" on the screen (at 100% view) to be either 1" or very close to it on paper??

Designers are a very visual group (I should know, I was one before becoming a tech). To every designer I know (and there are many) they don't care about having an extremely high resolution count. Some even set their 21" screens at 1024x768 since they work on them for 8+ hours at a shot and don't want to kill their eyes. Personally, I have mine set to 1280x1024 (21" screen at work). I have my 17.4" LCD (at home) set to that as well. I have found that to be the optimum for the lcd, my 19" screen (attached to the peecee).

I wouldn't expect Apple to crank the resolutions of their laptops for less then 1% of the people purchasing them. Everyone was cheering when Apple introduced the TiBook with the 15.2", 1152x768 screen. I did not hear ONE complaint about the screen. I have actually had people comment about how great it is, and that anything smaller wouldn't be as good.

I have seen one laptop (a peecee) set to a higher resolution and everything is so friggin small it's not even funny. About a week after the user set that resolution, he had to change it to a lower one because it was giving him too much eye strain (making him tired faster long before when it was set to lower numbers).

All in all, I think Apple got the resolutions right, and they shouldn't change them. If they do, then 1280x1024 would be the maximum that I can recommend or will use on any screen.

Then again, it's a free country, so set yours to whatever you want, and keep getting those eye exams and paying for new lenses. Personally, my prescription has not changed in the past 2+ years (past two exams, one per year, gave the exact same prescription). I attribute this to getting contact lenses (they can have that affect on some people).

[krossfyter]

Originally posted by AlphaTech
well 'Unregistered' if that really is your name... get the asbestos shorts on cause here come da flames...

:D

[DakotaGuy]

Not to sound too dumb here because a lot of you know more then I do about computers, but do you suppose that if they speed up the G3 in the iBook they will go with 14.1" across the board because it provides a bigger case. Maybe the new processor will run hotter and they will need more room for a better cooling system? I love my 12.1" cause it is compact and cool looking with a dang sharp and bright screen.

[emdezet]

i work part time at a German Apple retailer's. myself, i don't like the 14" iBook either, but Germans are buying and ordering them like crazy. most 14" iBook owners do not care for resolution but size. they feel 12" to be simply too small for them.

the big iBook is currently around 2500 Euro,
the 550 TiBook around 3000 Euro.
(1 Euro = 0,86 US cent)

people buy the G3 machine to actually save money. they want the web, email, word processing and a little game now and then on a bigger screen.

but now here's something i desperately need to know.
when hooking up a Pismo, a Ti400MHz and my white 12" iBook to the tv
the latter was the only one to display fullscreen in any app! i love playing unreal tournament on my 29" Sony. but the Pismo and the Ti would run it in window mode only. and obviously without RAVE support. the same is true for iTunes visuals.

so what about that radeon? may i assume it features fullscreen display mode? i want one of these revamped entry-level TiBooks@133MHz. but i am honestly not buying one unless...

[lelereb]

I think that fit a bit larger screen in the original sized iBook was a better idea.
The 12.1 iBook has some space around the screen, reducing this border it's not impossible to reach a 13 diagonal.
The reduced border always makes great effetc and makes resemble the screen larger than real.

[Unregistered]

i'm more on the tech side of the isle (EECS undergrad), but the current low Ti resolution is the ONLY issue keeping me from getting one now. I'm going to wait til the next revision.
14' PC laptops have offered 1400x1050 and 1600x1200 for years now--a 1536x1024 display would be less tight than even the 1400x1050. I'm currently using an iMac at 1024x768 and feel very squashed. OS X's oversized menus demand more resolution. I know BTO adds to Apple's overhead, but at the very least they should offer a better display as an option.
By the way, there is MacNN forum thread from a year ago echoing my sentiments.
http://forums.macnn.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=17&t=001155

[240vac]

I think that pretty much all of the unix people who have adopted, or are thinking of adopting, the TiBooks would agree - increased screen resolution would be one of the most looked for features. In particular, this would allow us to have terminals that can be smaller for the same 'text readability' - or alternatively, keep the same physical size but have a nice anti-aliased font. This applies to pretty much most applications, actually - you can generally change either the font size or the scale at which a document is viewed. And the menu strip at the top could do with being a bit smaller in any case...

[240vac]

Although I should add, that what would be of even more benefit than increasing the screen resolution, without changing the hardware at all, would be for Apple to introduce a better anti-aliasing scheme. The current one is not exactly state of the art. Perhaps they could license Adobe's "CoolType" pixel-subsampling system for use in OS X? This would give an increase in effective resolution for LCD screens without them having to change the LCD displays on the powerbooks at all.

[AlphaTech]

Originally posted by 240vac
Although I should add, that what would be of even more benefit than increasing the screen resolution, without changing the hardware at all, would be for Apple to introduce a better anti-aliasing scheme. The current one is not exactly state of the art. Perhaps they could license Adobe's "CoolType" pixel-subsampling system for use in OS X? This would give an increase in effective resolution for LCD screens without them having to change the LCD displays on the powerbooks at all.

I would like to see Apple add the ability to change the font size that is used by the system, desktop and folders. I typically use either 10 or 11 point Arial under OS 9.2.2. They probably could do something with the type color to allow you to either change it, depending on what your background/desktop color/image is. Or have it adjust on the fly (depending on what the background is).

[cryptochrome]

OS X's rendering system (Quartz) is already resolution independent. You can see this when you shrink a quicktime movie into the dock and it continues to play. However, much of the system interface is still drawn using bitmapped images that were never meant to change resolution.

With a little effort (well, maybe more than a little) OS X and in particular its finder could be made completely resolution independent (via higher resolution bitmaps or even vector graphics for critical interface elements like buttons, bars, etc.). Instead of messing around with monitor resolution by choosing presets you could work a slider that controls the relative sizes of the menubar, individual windows, etc, rendering vector graphics appropriately and antialiasing bitmaps to the fullest extent of the technology. Come to think of it making the resizing process user friendly might be a little tricky, but I'm sure apple would be up to it. They could even make the process automatic. A resolution independent (but aware) GUI interface would completely free users from the constraints of existing interfaces. Ultimately it's going to be essential anyway, as VERY high resolution monitors penetrate the marketplace... especially in the professional disciplines of graphics (Apple's forte), science (their newest opportunity), and engineering (the ultimate market).

Quartz makes it possible. I suspect they're working on it already.

[AlphaTech]

cryptochrome

I suspect that you are correct in thinking that Apple is already working on that. We might see something like it with 10.1.3 or 10.2, but may not be fully implimented until 10.3 or later.

For Apple to go with a higher resolution lcd in the laptops would most likely increase the price tag. Right now, they are at a good spot, and I think more people would complain about the prices going up, then about the lack of higher resolution numbers.

[cmoney]

Originally posted by Unregistered
i'm more on the tech side of the isle (EECS undergrad), but the current low Ti resolution is the ONLY issue keeping me from getting one now. I'm going to wait til the next revision.
14' PC laptops have offered 1400x1050 and 1600x1200 for years now--a 1536x1024 display would be less tight than even the 1400x1050. I'm currently using an iMac at 1024x768 and feel very squashed. OS X's oversized menus demand more resolution. I know BTO adds to Apple's overhead, but at the very least they should offer a better display as an option.
By the way, there is MacNN forum thread from a year ago echoing my sentiments.
http://forums.macnn.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=17&t=001155

whoa momma. i've seen 15" screens with 1280x1024 and that's really the max i'd go. i once saw 1600x1200 on a dell and that was a joke. how people use that is beyond me. i'd have a headache in five minutes.

and BTO isn't really an option when you're talking about LCD screens. as far as apple's concerned, different size lcd means different product. and that makes sense too. apple doesn't deal with the economies of scale that dell does, so they can't offer the flexibility that dell does in some of its bto processes.

[cmoney]

Originally posted by AlphaTech

I have seen one laptop (a peecee) set to a higher resolution and everything is so friggin small it's not even funny. About a week after the user set that resolution, he had to change it to a lower one because it was giving him too much eye strain (making him tired faster long before when it was set to lower numbers).

hmmm, how'd he do that. after all, lcds have one native resolution, anything less and you're talking interpolation. i've seen a few pc laptops interpolate to 800x600 (from 1024x768) and it ain't pretty. macs laptops do a much much nicer job, but even then, it's still only good enough for games. i wouldn't set my ibook 500 to 800x600 as my normal work resolution.

All in all, I think Apple got the resolutions right, and they shouldn't change them. If they do, then 1280x1024 would be the maximum that I can recommend or will use on any screen.

Then again, it's a free country, so set yours to whatever you want, and keep getting those eye exams and paying for new lenses. Personally, my prescription has not changed in the past 2+ years (past two exams, one per year, gave the exact same prescription). I attribute this to getting contact lenses (they can have that affect on some people).
i wish it were as easy as saying "set yours to whatever you want" but it's not. lcds have a single native resolution as i said above.

the only real solution to this is to have a 300dpi screen (like the ones ibm supposedly makes) and to make os x resolution independent. that way, the "1600x1200 on a 15" screen" people can have their space and the "800x600 on a 15" screen" people can still read. the OS would take care of all the recalculations needed. and in system preferences, you'd just have a slider control that resizes the screen elements. everything would always be readable because of the high resolution. we'd actually need to come up with a new screen measurement or benchmark because pixels would be irrelevant!

and then you can even have a few presets for people like print and graphic designers so it matches up with picas and whatever. but i'd put this at more like OS XI or even OS XII instead of 10.3. that's a huge architectural change and would affect all the programs that are running on the os.

ah, how sweet would that all be...

oh, getting contacts didn't change my rate of perscription changes. i've been wearing contacts for the past 6 years and my eyes didn't stop until the past two years. oh, and in the last exam, i found out i've got better than 20/20 vision with my current contacts. hooray!

[AlphaTech]

Originally posted by cmoney


whoa momma. i've seen 15" screens with 1280x1024 and that's really the max i'd go. i once saw 1600x1200 on a dell and that was a joke. how people use that is beyond me. i'd have a headache in five minutes.


Thank you...

[alex_ant]

Originally posted by AlphaTech
well 'Unregistered' if that really is your name... get the asbestos shorts on cause here come da flames...


Sorry, "Unregistered" was me, forgetting to login. :)

All your complaints are valid. I guess it's just a matter of preference - I would prefer 1536x1024, while I know others who would, and you would prefer 1152x768, while you know others who would as well. Okey-dokey. I think us 1536x1024'ers are probably a bit more numerous than the 1% you make us out to be, but, whatever.

It could be said that 1152x768 --> 1536x1024 would be a pretty big jump. How about a compromise? 1280x960? Still a little too low for me, but still a little high for you - perfect. :)

Alex

[alex_ant]

Originally posted by cmoney

i wish it were as easy as saying "set yours to whatever you want" but it's not. lcds have a single native resolution as i said above.

the only real solution to this is to have a 300dpi screen (like the ones ibm supposedly makes) and to make os x resolution independent. that way, the "1600x1200 on a 15" screen" people can have their space and the "800x600 on a 15" screen" people can still read. the OS would take care of all the recalculations needed. and in system preferences, you'd just have a slider control that resizes the screen elements. everything would always be readable because of the high resolution. we'd actually need to come up with a new screen measurement or benchmark because pixels would be irrelevant!

There you go. Good thinking. Unfortunately, as you said, it's quite a ways away.

How about this solution: Apple should make what *I* want and everyone else can SHOVE IT!! :)

Yeah, I like that solution the best. :)

Alex

[AlphaTech]

Originally posted by alex_ant


Sorry, "Unregistered" was me, forgetting to login. :)

All your complaints are valid. I guess it's just a matter of preference - I would prefer 1536x1024, while I know others who would, and you would prefer 1152x768, while you know others who would as well. Okey-dokey. I think us 1536x1024'ers are probably a bit more numerous than the 1% you make us out to be, but, whatever.

It could be said that 1152x768 --> 1536x1024 would be a pretty big jump. How about a compromise? 1280x960? Still a little too low for me, but still a little high for you - perfect. :)

Alex

Ahh...

I think something along the compromise could work... We will all have to wait and see what Apple does though, and go from there.

[emdezet]

could any of you Titanium owners please tell me, if the RADEON MOBILITY can display fullscreen thru the s-videojack?

someone please at least throw me a link to shut me up :-)

[alex_ant]

Originally posted by emdezet
could any of you Titanium owners please tell me, if the RADEON MOBILITY can display fullscreen thru the s-videojack?

someone please at least throw me a link to shut me up :-)

Well, I've never played any games on mine. The only time I've had mine connected to a TV was to play a DVD, and *that* worked full-screen, but I know that's probably not the same as a game. I don't see why a game *wouldn't* display full-screen with video mirroring, but...

The only link I could give that might help would be one to Google.

Alex

[Unregistered]

Originally posted by digitalrampage
I work in an Apple reseller, and the 14 inch iBooks are not that incredibly popular.

The best feature about the 12 inch iBook is its size... thats a major selling point to children, students etc...

To go 14 inch across the line would be stupid! A higher res on the top of the line would be good, but ditching the 12 inch would certainly reduce sales...

:eek:

So dont say DieBook... the 12 inch has to stay, in at least a combo format.

i like the 12 inch laptop which is under five pounds and a 14 inch laptop would not have that lightness advantage

[AlphaTech]

From what I have seen, both iBooks have a place. Some people want the smaller screen, while others want the larger. Just like some people want the PowerBook.

To each his/her own (Mac's hopefully).

[Classic]

Check out MacOS Rumors (http://www.mosr.com) they've got some new dirt on the sizes of the portables, materials, and eventual superdrives in Powerbooks.

[Curiousstrngmint]

I'll be a-headin' off to college in the fall and I was planning on waiting until MWNY to buy a laptop seeing as I figure that Apple will introduce anything new during the keynote.

I have two questions, I suppose...first is would people recommend getting a Tibook now or in the near future or would you recommend waiting for MWNY and see what they come up with?

Secondly, would you consider it generally a better idea to get a Tibook, say the midrange 667, or to get an iBook (IF they give it a decent graphics processor!), and then to upgrade to something spiffier a couple of years down the line?

Thanks.

[AlphaTech]

Personally, I would go with the fastest TiBook when you are ready.

I would also recommend waiting for MWNY since if you don't you will probably be kicking yourself at that time. I made the mistake of not waiting to buy a system when I got my tower. About a month later (at one of the expo's) they released the dp500.

I would also recommend going to at least 512MB of memory in the laptop. Get all CL2 (or better if it comes out) rated memory when you do.

[emdezet]

Originally posted by Curiousstrngmint
I have two questions, I suppose...first is would people recommend getting a Tibook now or in the near future...?

Secondly, would you consider it generally a better idea to get a Tibook, say the midrange 667, or to get an iBook...?

Thanks.

i got one of the very first dual-usb iBooks shipped to Germany. i had had it for months when the upgrades to 600MHz and Combo became available and after that affordable. so it was ok with me. NOW, however, is not the time to buy. NOW is the time to wait for the new TiBook.

Unless of course, you don't need the G4's velocity engine, a widescreen display, the pc-card slot or infrared. In that case go out and buy the iBook. It's a fine machine - as is. Personally I'll sell mine only for the new TiBook, which I want for hard disk recording and audio editing, games (2b honest), MacOS X's performance, and for other (irrational) reasons :))

emdezet

[Gelfin]

What's up with all of you who are making appeals to the Laws of God and Nature to justify why higher resolution is undesirable to you and therefore must be Just Wrong for everyone? In my experience, half of the computer-using population spend their time asking the other half how they can read that tiny text on their screens. I live on the tiny text side of that divide. Personally, I use the highest resolution available on an LCD, and the highest resolution I can get at 75Hz or better on a CRT, and it just doesn't bother me.

If you get right down to it, I'd much rather have 2048x1536 resolution and use slightly larger screen fonts, given the choice.

I understand the argument that higher resolution LCDs are more expensive to put into laptops, but this argument that "I don't find higher resolution useful therefore anyone who doesn't agree with me lives in a fantasy world" doesn't fly. You're certainly welcome to use your computer in whatever way makes you comfortable, but speaking personally, if I could ask for one thing in my Powerbook, it would be higher screen resolution.

[emdezet]

[i]if I could ask for one thing in my Powerbook, it would be higher screen resolution. [/B]
if the gpu and the cpu back it up to keep aqua fluid....

which is why i am so particularly freaked out about that radeon 7500 mobility. i foresee it will become a great Jedi Knight, i mean TiBook.

emdezet

[Curiousstrngmint]

I suppose what I'm really wondering is whether people think a college student would have a use for a tibook or whether an ibook is plenty powerful. Also the advantage of getting an ibook is that you can save like $500 or $750, and put that towards a new laptop a couple years later. Thoughts? Thanks.

PS--If there are any college students out there please make yourself heard.

[Gelfin]

Originally posted by Curiousstrngmint
I suppose what I'm really wondering is whether people think a college student would have a use for a tibook or whether an ibook is plenty powerful. Also the advantage of getting an ibook is that you can save like $500 or $750, and put that towards a new laptop a couple years later. Thoughts? Thanks.

PS--If there are any college students out there please make yourself heard.

Oh, yeah, if you're a college student, go for the iBook. It's a little tougher and a lot smaller if you get the 12.1". The iBook is still the "life in a backpack" laptop. The Ti is more expensive and requires a little more careful handling, neither of which seem well suited to college life. The iBook will be plenty for your needs, and you can spend the extra money on pizza and beer. ;)

[Gelfin]

Originally posted by Gelfin
The iBook will be plenty for your needs, and you can spend the extra money on pizza and beer. ;)

Oh. Uh, unless of course you're a parent shopping for laptops to send off to school with your 18-year-old, and in that case of course what I meant to say was, "you can spend the extra money on textbooks and good, nutritious food." :D

[evanmarx]

Originally posted by cmoney


whoa momma. i've seen 15" screens with 1280x1024 and that's really the max i'd go. i once saw 1600x1200 on a dell and that was a joke. how people use that is beyond me. i'd have a headache in five minutes.



absolutely! ... my buddys also have the 1600x1200 dells ... this is so usseless ... all they are doing is codeing ... so to see anything they have to pump up their standard font size to a whopping 18 points or more ... so what does ahigher resolution do 4 ya? except that the fonts look awful, because the the screen fonts look bad in that size ...

the only progs that use taht resolution are finalcut pro or macromedia director or flash... but then again you'd want more landscape profiles as the cinema display offers, not just pumping up the pixels .... i have lots of clients that keep bugging me to make font sizes bigger in my projects .. imagine i'd have1600x1200!!

and in designing webpages the superhighres gives u a totally wrong feeling for size ... well anyway

[AlphaTech]

I wonder if Apple could give us more resolution options on the current TiBooks (rev a and b) with a firmware update.

Any comments??

[esp49129]

Originally posted by Curiousstrngmint
I suppose what I'm really wondering is whether people think a college student would have a use for a tibook or whether an ibook is plenty powerful. Also the advantage of getting an ibook is that you can save like $500 or $750, and put that towards a new laptop a couple years later. Thoughts? Thanks.


You wanted some feedback from a college student, so here it is:

Honestly, you don't need a tibook. They're expensive, they're targeted at professionals or business execs and they're simply too big and fragile. Imagine if someone spilled coffee over it, or stole it from you after two weeks! (yes, laptop thefts are rampant on any campus)

From my experience (drooling over my friends' laptops... I'm just a prospective buyer too!), it's all a question of how you want to balance display size versus weight versus price. Among the Mac crowd, some have 500mhz ibooks and are very happy with them, others have older G3 powerbooks (400mhz or 500mhz) and are equally content.

Processing power isn't the issue: students care about using MS Office, IE Explorer, itunes and perhaps photoshop. I'd heartily recommend either one of the above computers. If you don't want a used computer, then a 14 inch display means the larger ibook, which I've never seen before.

Finally, (sorry for the length) I'd tell you: YOU'VE HIT IT RIGHT ON THE NAIL!!!
Much better to save 500$+ now that you can use for other priorities (or a new computer/upgrade later on), than to spend them on useless perks like a titanium laptop. Let's face it, the ibook is already outdated, but that's why people can afford it. PCs drive technological innovation, and they're outdated every three months. Don't blind yourself, the same thing happens quickly enough for macs (maybe takes half a year). And if you need to do some supercomputing in college, you sure won't be using a laptop!

Last, wait as long as you can. You'll never regret it. You can even wait several months into college, because first papers are usually due only in mid-October to November. That way, you'd also get a much better idea of what you actually want. Of course, that means keeping your hand away from your credit card for many more months to come...
Good luck!

[AlphaTech]

If you intend to do any video games, don't use the iBook (uses the 8MB rage 128 where the TiBook has the 16MB mobile radeon). While the iBook might do ok on strategy games, anything more graphic intense will choke on it. I don't know of any college students that don't have games on their computers. The same is true for professionals, just the games are sometimes different.

For the long haul, a new TiBook will be a better option. Especially considering that the G4 processor will have a longer life span, and performs much better on Altivec aware applications (and OS X).

Personally, I would never buy anything that didn't have at least a G4 processor in it.

[Curiousstrngmint]

Thanks a lot, esp49129, for that post. My only concern is whether the G3 will still be viable for the long haul. Otherwise I'd spring for the 14inch iBook, all maxed out...I can do without heavy-duty games, and I'd probably be better off without them anyway. But hopefully at MWNY they'll give the iBook the mobile radeon or geforce2go, and then it's probably iBook for me and off to NYC.

[swahilibill]

The iBook kicks anus and I love it to death. It has great graphics, wonderful drive capabilities and really great for consumers. Does anybody know where I can get a storage card for my Newton Emate. I just go mine and I dont know crap about it. If you have info or a site I can get it at, email me at robertherman87@earthlink.net. Thanks,

Swahilibill

[AmbitiousLemon]

As far as this side track goes with what to buy. Alpha in my opinion knows whats best. The ibook is great right now, yes. But if you are a college student then you want a computer that will still be able to run all the newest operating systems and applications 4 or 5 years from now. The ibook flunks in a heartbeat. the people reccommending the ibook have either never owned many computers or replaced their computers more often than every 4 or 5 years.

Imagine picking up your beautiful new ibook being perfectly happy for two years and then suddenly noticing you can use any new applications and cant install apple's newest operating system you will be disappointed, and you will wish you had shelle dou the extra $700, because it would have lasted you another 2 or 3 years.

I you buy the ibook, you will probably eat up that extra $700 bucks you saved early on to upgrade the computer later. Or you will shell out another $2000 for a new computer after two years. Either way you didnt save any money in the end.

And the main topic. Have to say Alpha is wrong. Gel has the right idea on this one. But this is assuming people are using OSX. If you only use OS9 then Alpha is right, anything bigger is just silly (ala peecee users). But OSX eats up screen realestate like never before. The only way to save a bit of that space is to reduce those icons size thus negating one of the features of OSX. I you really want to take advantage of OSX we need the IBM lcds (you know the ones that cost $10,000). Crank up the font size and icons size and you have a screen that displays things that are indistinguishable from the real world. This is the key to getting truly realistic easy on the eye displays. Its a ways off because of cost, but if we take baby steps in that direction we will get to the nice lcds in a few years.

All of you who say you can reduce dock and icons size and therefore dont need more space, you are right. But this is a work around. You are solving a problem. And you shouldnt have to. You should be able to use thos ebig icons. And the big system fonts shouldnt bother you. Its good to know most of us know how to work around these problems, but id rather see them solved by higher res lcds. That way we get space AND nice pictures. Reading would be so much easier and my pretty icons would remain pretty.

[Vanilla]

I notice MacCenter are offering a free airport base station with every 667 TiBook. Its admittedly a wild leap of imagination, but could this not be construed as "clear the decks any way you can, we got new models coming in"?

[Mr. Anderson]

Originally posted by Vanilla
Its admittedly a wild leap of imagination, but could this not be construed as "clear the decks any way you can, we got new models coming in"?

Sure, its a $300 insentive. But it would seem more like they're trying to get rid of Airports. I checked apple.com and the only special deals they had were on the 2001 model machines, which isn't too bad, actually.

[AmbitiousLemon]

Originally posted by dukestreet


Sure, its a $300 insentive. But it would seem more like they're trying to get rid of Airports. I checked apple.com and the only special deals they had were on the 2001 model machines, which isn't too bad, actually.

interesting that you should say that. for months now apple has been dumping airports, powerbooks, and ibooks. likewise vendors have been dumping airports and powerbooks. apple employees are getting amazing deals on powerbooks right now. we all thought it meant new powerbooks at tokyo and it didnt happen. seems like they are really gearing up for a big update to the powerbook. if they wait till NY it will be 11months since the last update. if they felt they needed to wait that long they must have had somthing big in the works. new airport could be part of it. any other guesses?

[mcrain]

I was hoping for an upgrade so I could get off the fence and buy a mac, but nothing happened at Tokyo. Now, they have all these deals, and I was again thinking about hopping off the fence, but I worry about an upgrade or revision right after I buy. I'm going to wait a little longer and let my bank account build up, and hopefully in the near future something gets done and I will, like most of you, be a mac owner!! I am looking forward to opening up my first mac box, and taking out the mac packaging, and reading the mac instructions (no, that wouldn't be any mac fun), then plugging the mac plug into the mac wall and mac using my mac mac. Well, I've got mac work to mac do today or I'll get mac fired!

[jefhatfield]

Originally posted by BeerDrinker29
Nothing really new there, except for that screen resolution. The iBook line moving to 14 inch screens has been around for awhile. I hope it's not true..

i like the 12 inch screen because the smaller and lighter case makes this an ultra portable at under five pounds (maybe ultra portable is even lighter by description these days)

the 14 inch screen is beautiful but the whole laptop is a pound heavier and that pound does make a difference...my old ibook is a few more ounces heavier than that and it's too heavy...and my pc laptop is a pound heavier than the 14 inch ibook and the thing feels like i am carrying around a minitower

[AlphaTech]

Originally posted by jefhatfield


i like the 12 inch screen because the smaller and lighter case makes this an ultra portable at under five pounds (maybe ultra portable is even lighter by description these days)

the 14 inch screen is beautiful but the whole laptop is a pound heavier and that pound does make a difference...my old ibook is a few more ounces heavier than that and it's too heavy...and my pc laptop is a pound heavier than the 14 inch ibook and the thing feels like i am carrying around a minitower

Jef, I would hate to see you lugging around an old PowerBook then. Back when they were over 7 pounds. The 14" iBook is spec'd to be 5.99 pounds (call it 6) which is not an anchor by any means. Granted, I wouldn't want to lug around a 10 pound laptop, but all the current offerings from Apple are no more then the 6 pounder.

[jefhatfield]

with power adapter and battery (which like most pc laptops is underpowered) tips the scale at over 7.5 pounds

throw in my techie manuals, pens, pencils, and alka selzer, then you are talking fifteen pounds everywhere i go...to clients, to students' homes, to school, to borders books to check out mac and pc mags, and everywhere else

one day, apple may make a super-portable like sony's C1 laptop which is just over 2 pounds w/o external cd-rom or power adapter

for short excursions, you can carry it in a purse or a large pocket...really cool, but the screen is a short 8" inch lcd and a little hard to see and the keyboard is at 75 percent instead of the standard 90 percent mobile users are accustomed to

[mcrain]

It seems that one thing y'all can try is lightening the bag itself. Rather than the heavy leather bags a lot of people carry, there are many bags made from lightweight materials. My bag is fairly light (www.sjdesign.com) and the little file things that flop over it are removable so I don't always have that extra weight.

[AlphaTech]

I have a Brenthaven backpack type bag for my TiBook. It is made of the lightweight materials and I usually don't put all that much else into the bag. Power adapter, cord, podium cooler thingy, Macally optical mouse, pad (HD logo on it :D ), and maybe a magazine or three and the charger for my iPod. There are days I have to check and make sure the laptop is in it, it's that light, at least to me it is.

[kishba]

In a year or so I will have to get a new laptop for college and I was considering getting the 12" iBook (hopefully it'll be a g4 by then)

I really hope Apple doesn't change all the iBooks to 14" screens... If they do I'll just have to get a TiBook -- it's one extreme or another for me :)