PowerBook Rumors (17 and 15inch)

[MacRumors]

PowerPage claims (http://www.powerpage.org/story.lasso?newsID=10831) a dual 17" Powerbook is in the stars for 2004:

The latest from the campus is that the 17" PowerBook will be dual processor by 2004, or should I say sometime in 2004. Apple wants to be the first mass produced dual processor laptop on the market.



While MacWhispers reports (http://www.envestco2.com/macwhispers/archives/000056.php) 15" Powerbooks are ramping up, with the possibility of 970's in the PowerBooks in the future:

The new 15.4-inch PowerBook has recently been contracted to the same assembly plant that is building the 17-inch PowerBook. We have been told that "integrating the IBM chip into both products has been underway for some time," and that a PPC 970 variant of the largest PowerBook is "only slightly behind" its mid-size brother.

The IBM PowerPC 970 was announced by IBM last year (2002) and has been the subject of much speculation and interest in the Mac community. Multiple sources have indicated that the 970 will find its way into Apple computers. The first incarnation is likely to be the PowerMac line -- while eventual PowerBook integration is expected, the timeframe is unknown, with MacWhispers providing the only source of rumors that such integration will happen sooner than later.

[AhmedFaisal]

Yes, brothas, YES!!! Keep the rumors like that coming :D .
Lets smite those infidel x86 Taliban into the dust! :D

Ahmed

[utilizer]

In the spirit of continuing the theme of the year of the notebook for Apple, this is fantastic news. And oh yeah, dual 970 PowerBooks by next year. It doesn't get much sweeter than that!

[mymemory]

Well, if I get a dual processor PB that will end up slower than a PC laptop... Mmmmm.

The idea sounds nice but sound like another exotic feature if those are 2 x 1.2Ghz processors.

Now, lets see what the future prepare for us.

I would like to have a unit like that of course, a powerfull fully portable machine!

[GeneR]

After trying the dual 1.42GHz Powermac, I am stoked. Now, if the world doesn't end before then, I'd like to get one of them dual 17" babies too!

:D

[e-coli]

Yeah, baby.

I called it first. Here (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=17085&highlight=dual+processor) ;)

[Steamboatwillie]

I'll bet dual CPU's will chew up the batteries pretty durn' quick!

Sure would be cool but is it needed? I suppose mobile video/audio production. Personally I would prefer to sit in front of a fast desktop to do heavy duty stuff as much as possible, given the choice. If there is a need though I am all for it!

[suzerain]

While at first glance putting 970s in the "mid-range" PowerBook before the top of the line seems ridiculous...if the rumors of the 970s being available soioner than previously thought, it *could* possibly br true, because Apple knows that they need to get these things out the door as soon as is humanly possible.

I dunno...I'm feeling optimistic with today's rumors...maybe I'll be working on a 970 by the end of July?

[idkew]

i am still a naysayer.

we will see a g4 based Al 15.x" before a 970 based one.

or

we will see the update (970) to the 15" AFTER desktops get the 970.

[Hous68]

I parsed the title as two 17" screens, not processors. heh. :D

[GeneR]

I said this before in another post (which I can not remember where), but I hope having dual chips in a PB doesn't lead to sterilization due to their close proxity to certain family jewels... ahem!

:D

[idkew]

Originally posted by Steamboatwillie
I'll bet dual CPU's will chew up the batteries pretty durn' quick!

Sure would be cool but is it needed? I suppose mobile video/audio production. Personally I would prefer to sit in front of a fast desktop to do heavy duty stuff as much as possible, given the choice. If there is a need though I am all for it!

it would be easy to set a preference to shut off or cycle down one of the processors while on battery power to save juice. i am sure it would eat more juice, but the 970 uses roughly half the power than the current 1ghz g4 does, so that makes it possible and useable.

right now, from what i have read, the 970 eats 10 or so watts at low clock speeds. it jumps a bunch for higher clock speeds, so that would mean we might see two lower speed cpus in one configuration and one higher speed cpu in another config.

[thies]

"The new 15.4-inch PowerBook has recently been contracted to the same assembly plant that is building the 17-inch PowerBook."


Does that mean it'll again be half a year between the laptop being released and it actually being delivered?

[GeneR]

Originally posted by thies
"The new 15.4-inch PowerBook has recently been contracted to the same assembly plant that is building the 17-inch PowerBook."


Does that mean it'll again be half a year between the laptop being released and it actually being delivered?

:D I hope not.

[Stelliform]

OK, I just got my Powerbook in November. I will have it paid off in October. I figured at least two years would be a good run. If the 970's preform like expected, and then they release dual CPU's... I'll ebay my TiBook in a second to get a dual laptop. (Just for bragging rights, because really the 1Ghz is probably more than I need anyway. ;))

[zedwards]

Please ppl, They havn't even come out with a Pro desktop and your already squacking/dreaming about a "seemingly killer" laptop.

Q: tell me what utilizes 64 bit processors??
A: High end servers, render farms, and clusters.

Few desktops (even Pro) let alone laptops will ever utilize a 64 bit processor. Sure the power consumption is low, but you think the Al 12" is hot... Also, all the apps will need to be rewritten to even take advantage of the 64 bit addressing. Most apps dont even utilize the second processor.

[herr_neumann]

Let me quote myself from the other thread:

"MHO.... Apple needs to have the new Shiznit shipping by the back to school market. Period. That is it. How many new college students will be getting computers as graduation presents? They should be making them availible to order by june shipping by august (finally one situation were semester schools are good for something, long live the quarter system).

This also coincides with educational purchasing. I know the UC System Departments spend every last dime of their budgets on the last day of their financial year, old computers line the halls here at Davis. (good place to get a monitor or old system for FREE)

Even though I am probably wrong, it just makes sense to me."

I know you feel me here....

[phampton81]

Originally posted by zedwards
Q: tell me what utilizes 64 bit processors??
A: High end servers, render farms, and clusters.

Few desktops (even Pro) let alone laptops will ever utilize a 64 bit processor.

Man oh man have we been over this a thousand times. The 64-bitness if you will, is not what we are screaming about, we are exstactic because this 970 just blows the doors off the G4, not because it is 64 bit, but because it just flat out rocks. Can I get a 'hell yeah' out of anyone here?

[jettredmont]

Originally posted by mymemory
Well, if I get a dual processor PB that will end up slower than a PC laptop... Mmmmm.

The idea sounds nice but sound like another exotic feature if those are 2 x 1.2Ghz processors.

Now, lets see what the future prepare for us.

I would like to have a unit like that of course, a powerfull fully portable machine!

1.2GHz processors running full bore (970's have such a low power consumption they really don't need to be throttled down to preserve battery like their Intel counterparts) which, in desktops, are each approximately as fast as a 2GHz P4 (the 1.8GHz 970 SPEC's at about the same as a 2.8GHz P4) ... this would end up being slower than a Wintel desktop, but not by much.

Combine this with a more multi-proc-using OS X and the inevitable speed bump we'll see between now and 2004 when dualie PBs are introduced, and I can see a Dual PowerBook working it just as fast as most if not all non-Mac desktops (excepting, of course, HDD-intensive operations, which just can't be as fast on a notebook as they are on a desktop).

Assuming, of course, that the rumor is right ...

[idkew]

Originally posted by zedwards
Please ppl, They havn't even come out with a Pro desktop and your already squacking/dreaming about a "seemingly killer" laptop.

Q: tell me what utilizes 64 bit processors??
A: High end servers, render farms, and clusters.

Few desktops (even Pro) let alone laptops will ever utilize a 64 bit processor. Sure the power consumption is low, but you think the Al 12" is hot... Also, all the apps will need to be rewritten to even take advantage of the 64 bit addressing. Most apps dont even utilize the second processor.

and how will we ever fill that 20MB hard drive?

[jettredmont]

Originally posted by zedwards
Please ppl, They havn't even come out with a Pro desktop and your already squacking/dreaming about a "seemingly killer" laptop.

Q: tell me what utilizes 64 bit processors??
A: High end servers, render farms, and clusters.

Few desktops (even Pro) let alone laptops will ever utilize a 64 bit processor. Sure the power consumption is low, but you think the Al 12" is hot... Also, all the apps will need to be rewritten to even take advantage of the 64 bit addressing. Most apps dont even utilize the second processor.


1) In non-server applications, the 970 still kicks G4's butt on 32-bit processing code.

2) For apps that would benefit from 64-bit processing, there's very little "rewriting" to be done. Primarily, if the app is using pseudo-64-bit ints now then a simple recompile will push it up to using 64-bit native ints. In cases where the benefits are deeper (ie, using 64-bit ints instead of some floats, etc), a bit of design and investigation will be required to root out the places where it can be used. This is, as I've said before, nothing compared to rearchitecting for Altivec, Cocoa, or dual processors.

3) While most apps don't utilize dual processors in and of themselves, you always have multiple apps running on your machine (just OSX itself running spreads across the processors), and so your overall workload in real usage is often fairly well distributed. Note that the reason that you see very little relative performance boost on dual processor machines is more due to their shared bus than to uneven load distribution.

4) Power consumption for a .18-process 970 at 1.2GHz is 11W. Power consumption for a single .18-process G4 at 1GHz is 27W IIRC. Dual 970's would then consume (and thus dissipate) 0.3W less power than a single G4. Add to this that the two processors need not be piled one atop the other (one could be on one side of the laptop while the other is on the other side, though in reality they would likely be much closer), and you should end up with a much cooler lap in all than the current machines. Note that with smaller-scale manufacturing process (0.09 micron) a higher core frequency will yield the same power dissipation, so it is likely that sometime next year we'll be seeing significantly faster than 1.2GHz chips with similar (~11W) power dissipation figures.

[beatle888]

Originally posted by zedwards
Please ppl,


please zed, its not just about 64bit computing. its about all the goodies that come with it.

[type_r503]

hell yeah!

[e2chris]

omg I am drooling over the thought of dual processors.... Bugs and all (heat) I could care less.. the bragging rights alone are well worth this machine. =P

[DharvaBinky]

Originally posted by zedwards


Q: tell me what utilizes 64 bit processors??
A: High end servers, render farms, and clusters.



And game decks, and graphics cards, and graphics workstations, and network switches, and ... ...

narrow vision = narrow market

Dharvabinky

[e2chris]

wouldnt it be cool if they could have one processor shutoff when you unplug your PB. Now that would be some cool sh$t. Where's my credit card!

[e2chris]

Originally posted by phampton81
Man oh man have we been over this a thousand times. The 64-bitness if you will, is not what we are screaming about, we are exstactic because this 970 just blows the doors off the G4, not because it is 64 bit, but because it just flat out rocks. Can I get a 'hell yeah' out of anyone here?


HELL YEAH!!!!!

[jlambert]

Originally posted by zedwards
Few desktops (even Pro) let alone laptops will ever utilize a 64 bit processor. [/B]

And everything that could ever be invented has been right?

[Snowy_River]

Originally posted by zedwards
Please ppl, They havn't even come out with a Pro desktop and your already squacking/dreaming about a "seemingly killer" laptop.


I still assert that, whenever the 970 is release (whether later or - please, please, please - sooner) Apple will release it in both the PowerMacs and the PowerBooks at about the same time. (The actual release - as in shipping date - might not coinside, but the announcement more than likely will.) So, dreaming about a killer laptop before the new desktops have been released is not so strange to do...

Originally posted by idkew

and how will we ever fill that 20MB hard drive?


Hahahahaha! YES!

Originally posted by jettredmont

Power consumption for a .18-process 970 at 1.2GHz is 11W

Just as a note on the technical side, I believe that the 970 isn't being made on a .18-process. They're starting on a .13-process. Also, the power dissipation number that I've heard quoted again and again is 19W, not 11W. (vs. 29W for a 1GHz G4.)

[Steamboatwillie]

Originally posted by zedwards
Please ppl, They havn't even come out with a Pro desktop and your already squacking/dreaming about a "seemingly killer" laptop.

Q: tell me what utilizes 64 bit processors??
A: High end servers, render farms, and clusters.

Few desktops (even Pro) let alone laptops will ever utilize a 64 bit processor.

Whoa nelly, "ever" that's a huge assumption. Who really knows what the future holds 100 years or even 10 years from now. We could be all toting around a terabyte (or more) of storage in our decoder rings!

Also, all the apps will need to be rewritten to even take advantage of the 64 bit addressing. Most apps dont even utilize the second processor.

Agreed (today) but historically (with computers) talk of more power (and really in this case more memory than 2gb's) has always been viewed by most as "too soon" but it seems to me that off the shelf pc's running Linux are making movies like Shrek whereas a few years before only a high end SGI or SUN configuration would be applied to such a task. I believe the apps will come and the usefulness will be apparent as they roll out. Currently there is not much that most of us do that we feel a 64bit CPU/Architecture would offer in terms of performance however a few years ago I would not have dreamed about using a laptop to do mobile digital recording in the field. I don't feel that current apps should be brought up to speed with current hardware (dual cpu support, etc) in lieu of newer technology. If they can roll out something better and more promising, even if we can't take full advantage right away, then they should. Just my opinion.

[Snowy_River]

Originally posted by Steamboatwillie
I believe the apps will come and the usefulness will be apparent as they roll out. Currently there is not much that most of us do that we feel a 64bit CPU/Architecture would offer in terms of performance however a few years ago I would not have dreamed about using a laptop to do mobile digital recording in the field. I don't feel that current apps should be brought up to speed with current hardware (dual cpu support, etc) in lieu of newer technology.

On this same note, when has a developer ever created software that required hardware that didn't exist yet? Of course there aren't many applications that require 64 bit computing right now. Does that mean that developers won't create such applications when 64 bit computers are more common? I really doubt it.

I believe that someone who is really big in the computer industry once said that he couldn't imagine anyone ever needing more than 128kB of RAM...

[daedelgt]

I remember when 16 megs of ram cost 500 dollars :)

[locovaca]

I cannot imagine dual cpu laptops ever happening. If anything, I would expect a dual cpu iMac to come before. Why?

Heat.

Go ahead, write it off as being a hurdle Apple will get over. Apple is an innovative company, that's for sure, but they cannot defy physics. This one is so easy to debunk with simple math.

A dual processor laptop will output twice the wattage.

A dual processor will require twice as much current.

A dual processor laptop will not eliminate laptop's worse bottleneck, the hard drive.

A dual processor laptop will not go twice as fast.

And finally:

Two processors cost twice as much as one processor.


People complain about how "warm" their G4's get right now. Go ahead, stick a second processor in there- see how warm it gets them. People also complain about the fans in their laptops- just wait until you have twice as many.

Of course, this also excludes other side effects, such as the system controller getting warmer due to increased work, etc. It's a nice thought, but a dual processor laptop isn't really possible without it becoming less of a laptop and more of a portable desktop. Even then, the cooling system will make it much less of a reality.

[daedelgt]

Ahh, but the 970 uses almost half as much wattage, and when it's bumped down to a smaller micron, it will need even less.

That said, I don't forsee them in the laptops right away. Maybe MW January.

[locovaca]

Originally posted by daedelgt
Ahh, but the 970 uses almost half as much wattage, and when it's bumped down to a smaller micron, it will need even less.

That said, I don't forsee them in the laptops right away. Maybe MW January.

Every next generation of processor has used less heat than the previous. I'll believe it when I see it.

[-hh]

Originally posted by e-coli
Yeah, baby.

I called it first. Here (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=17085&highlight=dual+processor) ;)


Sorry...I made the relevant prediction last year (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=212324&highlight=dual#post212324), although I will admit that it was 12/31, a mere 8 days before you started the specific DP 17" PB thread :-)

Nevertheless, it does make for a good strategy: Steve's annoucment of "Year of the Laptop" has the potential to be pretty bold - - not only does Apple catch up to Windows on performance, but it looks like they'll have it in a laptop. Talk about trashing paradigms!


-hh

[dabirdwell]

What about a Dual 970 with variable bus timing, display-mounted audio output (freeing a little more space in the enclosure), and NO Hard Drive.

What could be the possibilities of ramdrives coming up for the 970?

Way too expensive?

Maybe not soon...

[jettredmont]

Originally posted by Snowy_River
Just as a note on the technical side, I believe that the 970 isn't being made on a .18-process. They're starting on a .13-process. Also, the power dissipation number that I've heard quoted again and again is 19W, not 11W. (vs. 29W for a 1GHz G4.)

Doh! Just looked it up, and you are absolutely right!

Good thing someone here remembers such things better than I!

A .13 micron-process 1.2GHz PPC 970 will dissipate 19W. Two will then (excluding any extra dissipation in the SC) dissipate 38W, which is more than the 29W for the G4, although the physical separation of the two chips should still keep your lap relatively cooler.

[Steamboatwillie]

Originally posted by daedelgt
I remember when 16 megs of ram cost 500 dollars :)

A thousand years ago when I sold pc hardware I remember custom bulding a "high-end" CAD system for a customer using a Harris 286 - 12mHz machine that cost around $4000.00 at the time. Change is inevitable.

Remember the big hoo-ha when the 32bit cpu's first came out? The same arguments were heard back then. "None of my 16bit apps will benefit from a 32bit processor" and they were right. How many of those 16bit apps are in mainstream use today?

On this same note what presedence did Microsoft set by pre-coding for hyperthreading? It's like a bizzare sadistic time implosion! First came the software (XP) then the chip? Obvoiusly Microsoft was in bed with Intel. Could Apple be up to the same trick with IBM? Could OS X be "pre-coded" or at the very least partialy prepared for the 970? It is possible that the advantage of the 970 may be greater then we all speculate. Let us hope Apple was taking notes from Microsoft (a bizzare statement in it's self!) It's always been the other way around so the way I see it M$ owes us at least one!

>100,000,000 fans rise to thier feet cheering while throwing apples at Bill Gates!<

Can a brother get an A-Men!

[2COOL4SCHOOL]

A dual processor will require twice as much current.

A dual processor laptop will not eliminate laptop's worse bottleneck, the hard drive.

A dual processor laptop will not go twice as fast.

And finally:

Two processors cost twice as much as one processor.

*********************************************************


True, but I think some people will buy it.
I too would love to see some sort of HD alternative. It might be a real long wait.
It is nice to see that note-books could rival some desktops/towers as they have been/and still are the weak sister.
As far as apps........build it and they will come.

[Steamboatwillie]

Originally posted by dabirdwell
display-mounted audio output (freeing a little more space in the enclosure), and NO Hard Drive.

An acoustically transparent LCD with some sort of hybrid, low power, electrostat speaker(s) behind it would be way cool. Just the sort of innovative thing Apple should do!

Hard drives suck. I am amazed that with all the innovations and leaps in technology that a better, faster storage device has not been created. I mean give me a break. We can put a man on the moon 30 years ago but a 200GB hard drive is not much (physically) smaller than a 10mb dinosaur. Moving parts break too easily too. Come on all you science engineering geeks, sharpen those pencils! I want my multi terabyte decoder ring by Christmas!!!

[2COOL4SCHOOL]

Originally posted by Steamboatwillie
An acoustically transparent LCD with some sort of hybrid, low power, electrostat speaker(s) behind it would be way cool. Just the sort of innovative thing Apple should do!

Hard drives suck. I am amazed that with all the innovations and leaps in technology that a better, faster storage device has not been created. I mean give me a break. We can put a man on the moon 30 years ago but a 200GB hard drive is not much (physically) smaller than a 10mb dinosaur. Moving parts break too easily too. Come on all you science engineering geeks, sharpen those pencils! I want my multi terabyte decoder ring by Christmas!!!

I could not agree more RE: Hard Drives. This might be one for the IBM Physics Dept.

[TyleRomeo]

hey do you remember when i said that there would be dual G4 powerbooks.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=21675

i guess we shall see

Tyler

[Steamboatwillie]

Originally posted by 2COOL4SCHOOL
I could not agree more RE: Hard Drives. This might be one for the IBM Physics Dept.

I made a joke in one of my posts on April Fools day about "Molecular Polymer Storage" but it was based on an article I had read a few years ago doing that very thing. They had a sugar cube size piece of plastic (made up of a special molecules that could have an electron shifted in one direction or another, basically a "bit") that used lasers to toggle the molecules to a true or false state effectively creating RAM. This little cube was able to hold vast amounts of data (I can't remember the actual capacity but it was huge) and even more importantly, because it was in three dimensions, the access time was very very fast. This prototype had a room full of equipment to run it so I see the problem there. I do appologize for not being able to quote the article or source as well as not being that versed in physics. I may be entirely using the wrong terminology to describe what I read aboiut. I was very excited at the time (seems to me the *big* hard drive of those days was a 200 megabyte [NOT gigabyte] Western Digital P.O.S.) I hope we something soon. Modern computing is almost like owning a Formula one race care with clay tires. (read slow hard drives)


<edit>

Just found this link if anyone is interested in this technology, it's old but touches on what I am talking about:
http://www.rl.af.mil/div/IFB/techtrans/datasheets/3DOptMem.html

</edit>

[Snowy_River]

Originally posted by Steamboatwillie

<edit>

Just found this link if anyone is interested in this technology, it's old but touches on what I am talking about:
http://www.rl.af.mil/div/IFB/techtrans/datasheets/3DOptMem.html

</edit>

While I do know a little bit about 3D optical storage, and it certainly is on the horizon, I'm afraid that the article that you referenced has some, uh, flaws in it. First, did you notice that according to the article we should have rewritable memory of this kind this year. And we should have had write-once memory of this kind since 2001. And I've been using CDs. Doh! Oh, and 1 terabit of information is not equivalent to 300,000 floppies, but more like 90,000 floppies. (Floppy? What's a floppy?;)) And who needs comments about accessing data at the speed of light? Whether your accessing data through a laser or through a magnetic read head, both are using fields that travel at the speed of light. That's not where the slow down is...

But, seriously, from what I understand this is very exciting technology, and may be here within the next five to ten years. It will likely revolutionize the way that we store all kinds of data, as it will allow us to use an optical medium (like CDs and DVDs) that is faster but not as fragile as current optical media.

About seven years ago there was a product introduced that was called a magneto-optical drive. It was supposed to have the durability of a CD, but the usability of a hard-drive. Unfortunately, the technology was a little lack-luster, and I haven't heard of them in some time.

In any event, I really wouldn't expect to see a 'sugar-cube optical hard-drive' in a Mac anytime soon. But I will look forward to it when it comes.

(How about an iPod based on one of these? 200,000 songs on your wrist!! :D)

[ozubahn]

Originally posted by 2COOL4SCHOOL
I could not agree more RE: Hard Drives. This might be one for the IBM Physics Dept.

Well, I don't know if you would call it the Physics Department, but IBM is definitely working on it. There is a reason they suddenly sold off their profitable hard drive business a year or so back. Check out Millipede if you haven't already: http://www.research.ibm.com/resources/news/20020611_millipede.shtml

It is essentially the old punch card idea updated with modern MEMS technology, so the holes are a tad bit smaller (oh, and it can un-punch the holes too). There's a lot of development left to do, but it works. There are still moving parts, if you consider a silicon cantilever flexing over a micron or two to be motion, but it sure beats spinning platters and read heads.

[tgrundke]

To all those who claim that Apple would never put the dualies in the 15" before the 17" (because the 17" is the flagship)...think twice.

While because of engineering I believe the dualies would go in the 17" first (space/heat issues), I believe most people buying the 17" aren't buying it just because it's the flagship: but because it's go that 17" screen.

When the 15" PowerBook gets its innards to match those of the 17" (bluetooth, backlit keyboard, etc.), then my case will make more sense. It's the screen size that you're paying for, that's about it.

So it really doesn't matter, from a marketing standpoint, which model has the dualies initially. In fact, I bet that if the specs on the 17" were brought to an updated 15", (more to the point: WHEN this happens), you'll see sales of the 17" begin to drop until the price of that model drops.

I still would like to see the 15-17" PowerBook range stick in the $2299-$2999 range. Anything above that is simply too hard to justify for a notebook.

[edenwaith]

Originally posted by daedelgt
I remember when 16 megs of ram cost 500 dollars :)

And I remember it costing my parents $300 to upgrade the old Tandy 1000 HX from 256 Kb of RAM to 640 KB of RAM. I could see quite a bit of improvement in some games because extra color and sounds were added to some games I had, like 1-on-1: Jordan vs. Bird.

I paid about $44 for my last 512 MB memory module...wow. I love cheap RAM. That same amount in late 80's prices would have cost $245,760...wow, nearly a quarter million dollars. However, I doubt any consumer computers back then could have even made use of 512 MB of RAM, anyway.

[edenwaith]

I think Apple should ditch the chemical symbol names (Ti, Al) and start using Greek symbols instead. The suggested title for a 17" dual processor Powerbook could be the
Pi-Rho book (this board strips away Greek characters).

Think of the benefits! Say you are camping and you need to start a fire. You can do one of various things:

1) Rub two sticks together.
2) Use a match.
3) Set the Pi-Rho
Book on top of some tinder and start playing a few rounds of Quake or do some heavy Photoshop work.

However it might be suggested to wear some fire-retardant clothing just in case the

Book does catch on fire.

Sorry for the bad pun, but it just worked too well.

[Pila]

Remeber that macosx, like other Unices, put date and time in a 32 bit integer which counts seconds elapsed from 1.1.1970.
So everyone needs 64 bit before 2030 when the counter will reset on 32 bit architecture. ;)

[porovaara]

Originally posted by locovaca

A dual processor laptop will output twice the wattage.

A dual processor will require twice as much current.

A dual processor laptop will not eliminate laptop's worse bottleneck, the hard drive.

A dual processor laptop will not go twice as fast.

And finally:

Two processors cost twice as much as one processor.


1) Simply not true. Dual procs will output twice the PEAK wattage.
2) Assumes both procs are enabled and being run at the same load.
3) The memory is probably a worse bottleneck on all current apple systems, since we are stuck with slow HDs for a while.
4) No but for well coded apps you will see significant improvement and with OS/X you will see a smoothness.
5) Economies of scale?

[edenwaith]

Originally posted by Pila
Remeber that macosx, like other Unices, put date and time in a 32 bit integer which counts seconds elapsed from 1.1.1970.
So everyone needs 64 bit before 2030 when the counter will reset on 32 bit architecture. ;)

Actually, the end of the epoch is closer to 2038. Also the date that older Macs (if they miraculously still work then) will either roll over or die...or roll over and die. The epoch lasts around 68 years, I believe, so 1970 + 68 = 2038. So, that will be the next Y2K type bug, which will happen right around my retirement, so that might be some extra money I might be able to pull in before I retire.

[daedelgt]

If this thing is still running in 30 years, I don't think I'd care so much about the time being off.

[Mr. MacPhisto]

If the 970s are ahead of schedule, this doesn't really surprise me. A couple of friends at IBM expected the 970s to be shipping in mass quantities by June. This should give Apple plenty of time to get machines ready for July releases.

Not from an inside source, but just an educated guess here: Apple may introduce its whole new line at one time. I think they will all be 970s - the consumer end stuff only receiving single chips and the high end receiving two. For instance, and iBook with a 1.2 GHZ PPC970 versus and PB with 2. Only problem is that the iBook would have significantly more batt life, BUT with the low=powered 970 running the show, a dual 970 on a PB still could get 5 hours of batt life. The iBook could get 7-8 hours, giving Apple amazing superiority with the laptops. The Power lines would also probably have another improvements on the FSB, cache, etc to make them clearly more powerful.

Any introduction would probably come with heavy price cuts to move the last G4s out of the market. But the impact of introducing a whole line of PPC 970 64 bit chips would give Apple a lot of media attention - and could get the interest of the average joe and tech geeks. Not only that, but the PPC 970 will be cheaper at the get go than the G4 is now, making the Macs less expensive, more powerful, and superior to PCs in just about every way.

[claughery]

okay... one question... WHY WOULD YOU SAY A JULY RELEASE??? the WWDC is set for June. This means that if coming soon, it will be in June, not July...

[Snowy_River]

Originally posted by Mr. MacPhisto
Not from an inside source, but just an educated guess here: Apple may introduce its whole new line at one time. I think they will all be 970s - the consumer end stuff only receiving single chips and the high end receiving two. For instance, and iBook with a 1.2 GHZ PPC970 versus and PB with 2. Only problem is that the iBook would have significantly more batt life, BUT with the low=powered 970 running the show, a dual 970 on a PB still could get 5 hours of batt life. The iBook could get 7-8 hours, giving Apple amazing superiority with the laptops. The Power lines would also probably have another improvements on the FSB, cache, etc to make them clearly more powerful.

I don't see Apple moving all (or probably even any just yet) of the PowerBooks to dual configurations. If the were to move the entire line to 970 (which I'm dubious about), I'd see it far more likely that they'd do something like placing iBooks in the range of 800MHz-1GHz, PowerBooks at something like 1.2GHz-1.4GHz, iMac and eMac at 1.0GHz-1.2GHz, and, finally, the new PowerMacs at 1.4GHz-2.0GHz (probably all duals, with the possibility of the lowest end model as a single).

All of that said, I think that it's more likely that the iBooks will be moved to the G4, using the PB12" as the template, and the iMacs and eMacs will stay on the G4, for a while. The G4 is still regarded as an impressive chip, at least in the mobility arena, so having the lowest end Apple laptop using the G4 will still 'get the attention of the media.'

While I am optomistic and hopeful, I know that this is still all in the realm of rumors. It will be a little while yet before we really know.

[matznentosh]

Originally posted by claughery
okay... one question... WHY WOULD YOU SAY A JULY RELEASE??? the WWDC is set for June. This means that if coming soon, it will be in June, not July...

Past experience with Apple - who has received their 17 in Powerbook yet? - is that a brand new product is announced, available for pre-order, but ships 2 -3 months later. So a June announcement would mean product in September.

I agree that a new iBook ought to be released in August for incoming students. But Jobs has said before that the G4 has considerable life in it. I think it highly unlikely the iBook will get a 970.

Most likely: new 15 in powerbook, still with G4 released in May,

970 desktop announced in June, available in September

970 powerbooks in the fall or winter,

iBook going to G4 at that time, or perhaps simply abandoning the iBook and marketing the 12 G4 powerbook as its replacement.

[ktlx]

Originally posted by porovaara
4) No but for well coded apps you will see significant improvement and with OS/X you will see a smoothness.

I wish people would stop saying that well written apps automatically benefit from dual processors and AltiVec. Not all applications can benefit from dual processors and AltiVec.

Sometimes the problem space cannot easily be segmented to see much improvement with multiple processors. Of the many others than can be segmented, they require significant memory bandwidth which Apple PowerMacs simply don't provide. A lot of applications that benefit from multiple threads and/or vector processing also require significant memory bandwidth moving data in and out of the processor. An SDR 167Mhz shared bus can't cut the mustard for those applications and so you see little if any improvement because they are already saturating the FSB.

I am not saying that all Mac applications are well written because I know they aren't. I just wish people would stop staying that because some application does not benefit from two processors or AltiVec, by definition it is not well written.

I also wish people who do not have significant experience trying to develop multithreaded and/or vector applications would just shut up until they know what they are talking about. It is not trivial to make most applications benefit from multiple processors and/or vector processors. This is especially true with systems that have a poor memory I/O subsystem like the G4. It is rare to find an application like encryption/decryption that is pretty trivial to see benefits.

[Rincewind42]

Originally posted by ktlx
I wish people would stop saying that well written apps automatically benefit from dual processors and AltiVec. Not all applications can benefit from dual processors and AltiVec.


I can agree with that. I can definately agree that there are many well written apps for which explicit multithreading and altivec are simply not feasible, practical, or useful.

However, nearly all OS X applications are implicitly threaded and nearly as many of those implicitly make use of Altivec. Altivec does make those operations the OS uses it for faster, and multithreading does enhance the OS's ability to provide services while providing for speed improvements on MP systems. Well written or not you get these advantages.

Thus it leads to the conclusion that a PowerPC with Altivec is better than one without (for our purposes) and that two CPUs really are better than one in all situations under MacOS X. You say that the memory systems are anemic in the current crop of G4s - agreed. However, it is not so bad that two CPUs can't do more work than one in most situations. Not every task is memory i/o bound after all :D.

[twelve]

apple is dead until they release these chips and they know it which is why they are ahead of schedule because they know it is absurd to recommend an apple until they do. this board needs to update the products page to say DO NOT BUY on all products until the 970 is in the machines.

[porovaara]

Originally posted by ktlx
[B]I wish people would stop saying that well written apps automatically benefit from dual processors and AltiVec.

Well written apps that are targetted for OSX will benefit because everything should be multithreaded. This is one of the reasons you choose a Mach kernel. Of course not every app on a mac will get extra performance from AltiVec but the bulk of the apps, since they are media based, would. Hell even a word-proc could get extra speed with some simple additions to things like presentation and image scaling/display; expand your thinking.

[Rincewind42]

Originally posted by porovaara
Well written apps that are targetted for OSX will benefit because everything should be multithreaded. This is one of the reasons you choose a Mach kernel. Of course not every app on a mac will get extra performance from AltiVec but the bulk of the apps, since they are media based, would. Hell even a word-proc could get extra speed with some simple additions to things like presentation and image scaling/display; expand your thinking.

Making everything multithreaded isn't as simple as choosing a kernel for the OS. There are dozens of other issues that can encourage or prevent you from being multithreaded.

As for a word processor using altivec, I'm sorry there is no point in writing that kind of code for that kind of application. 90+% of the time that a word processor is the front most application it is doing nothing. There is no reason to optimize the last <10% of the time that it uses. And since that program is using system services, I'm sure that image scaling & display is done by the system (why write all that code yourself for a word processor for christ sake??) and the system will, hopefully, use whatever optimizations are available at the time.

[locovaca]

Originally posted by porovaara
1) Simply not true. Dual procs will output twice the PEAK wattage.
2) Assumes both procs are enabled and being run at the same load.
3) The memory is probably a worse bottleneck on all current apple systems, since we are stuck with slow HDs for a while.
4) No but for well coded apps you will see significant improvement and with OS/X you will see a smoothness.
5) Economies of scale?

1. And they'll have about the same average output, especially because both processors are always used in a SMP aware OS.

2. Personally, if I had a dual cpu laptop, I would always run both. Again, with any SMP aware OS both CPU's are used. If anything I would rather have two highly clock throttled CPU's vs. one fast one.

3. But it won't be for the 970. 5400, 8 meg cache IBM drives will push 20 meg/sec sustained in any system, be it G4, 970, or X86.

4. I don't disagree, but for many apps I use that take the most advantage of a dual processor system I prefer to run on a desktop machine (more ram, faster hard drives)

5. I'd expect to see a starting price at $4000. For that much I'd rather just get a top of the line PM which will more than beat the specs on a laptop. Or even a mid level Xserve.

[Rincewind42]

Originally posted by locovaca
1. And they'll have about the same average output, especially because both processors are always used in a SMP aware OS.

More or less correct, but you also forget about the context of this conversation. If Apple were to put 2 PowerPC 970 chips at 1.2 Ghz, they'd together use about the same wattage as a single 1.25 Ghz 7455. So as far as power is concerned it's a non-issue.

2. Personally, if I had a dual cpu laptop, I would always run both. Again, with any SMP aware OS both CPU's are used. If anything I would rather have two highly clock throttled CPU's vs. one fast one.

There are reasons why you would want to shut one down completely - specifically to save power when on the battery. After all, if your just watching a DVD on a trans continental flight you really don't need 2 CPUs going full bore.

3. But it won't be for the 970. 5400, 8 meg cache IBM drives will push 20 meg/sec sustained in any system, be it G4, 970, or X86.

Hard drive speed isn't really all that big an issue. Anything that the system would really need on the HD will be cached in RAM anyway. And most operations in most programs just aren't bound by the speed of the hard disk, especially if you have lots of RAM, and when Apple does revise the PowerBook, I wouldn't expect anything other than the 12" to ship with less than 512 standard.

4. I don't disagree, but for many apps I use that take the most advantage of a dual processor system I prefer to run on a desktop machine (more ram, faster hard drives)

Some of us have just decided to make our PowerBooks our only computer :).

5. I'd expect to see a starting price at $4000. For that much I'd rather just get a top of the line PM which will more than beat the specs on a laptop. Or even a mid level Xserve.

You have got to be nuts! A second processor isn't gonna tack on anywhere near $1K to the price, probably more like $300-$400, and Apple would sell such a laptop as their topend model anyway. So that would put the PowerBooks topping off at $3200 (15") or $3700 (17"). After all, a couple of years ago the price difference between a single & dual PowerMac was only $300 at the same CPU speed.

[xenotek]

so i'm thinking of purchasing one of those spiffy powerbooks for college. if i buy the 17inch one now, would it still be top of the line by september, or should i expect an update before then? if anyone has any thoughts or suggestions, i would really appreciate it. thanks!

[daedelgt]

Originally posted by xenotek
so i'm thinking of purchasing one of those spiffy powerbooks for college. if i buy the 17inch one now, would it still be top of the line by september, or should i expect an update before then? if anyone has any thoughts or suggestions, i would really appreciate it. thanks!

I doubt we will see signifgant upgrades to the 17" until the very end of the year. By September you may see 1.1, 1.25 or 1.3 GHz G4s, but nothing else. Come December or January we could see some more signifigant upgrades like higher bus speed, bigger HDs etc. Not much until then though.

[Thanatoast]

ok, the one thing that gets me is the price. how can anyone be expected to drop $3700 on a daully laptop? how many people here are willing/able to do this? i mean, ouch! apparently this would be for only the professional jet set then, huh?

[daedelgt]

Originally posted by Thanatoast
ok, the one thing that gets me is the price. how can anyone be expected to drop $3700 on a daully laptop? how many people here are willing/able to do this? i mean, ouch! apparently this would be for only the professional jet set then, huh?

Thank you ADC discount :D

Z05M01M9W PBG4 17.0/1GHZ/1024/60G/SD/AP/BT/LL 1 2,879.00
With the following configuration:

Z05M_B_PROC 065-3719 1GHz PowerPC G4
Z05M_C_MEM 065-3723 1GB DDR RAM - 2 DIMMs
Z05M_D_HD 065-3716 60GB Hard Drive
Z05M_E_OD 065-3718 Super Drive
Z05M_F_KIT 065-3713 Country Kit/Airport
Z05M_G_OS 065-3712 Keyboard/Mac OS

[ewinemiller]

Originally posted by Thanatoast
ok, the one thing that gets me is the price. how can anyone be expected to drop $3700 on a daully laptop? how many people here are willing/able to do this? i mean, ouch! apparently this would be for only the professional jet set then, huh?

$3700 is a little high, but if it was a dual, I can get rid of a desktop. I need to keep a dual processor around for testing and debugging those nasty threading problems, I need a portable to keep working on the road. If I can satisfy both with a single purchase (and get that noisy quicksilver out from under my desk as a bonus) I would do so even at a premium over a normal laptop price.

I'd love to see a dual processor laptop where you could optionally shutdown a cpu when unplugged. I say optionally because there are some times when I'd swap battery life to get the extra cpu boost.

[luke_s]

its funny that people complain about $3700 being to high for a dual cpu notebook. in germany you pay over $4000 for the single cpu 17" in the apple store.........
btw if apple ever brings out the 970 at 1.2ghz in a powerbook the intel centrino will be @2ghz and be for times as fast, so they better do it quick..... :)

[cubist]

Originally posted by Mr. MacPhisto
... Not from an inside source, but just an educated guess here: Apple may introduce its whole new line at one time. ...

Since Apple outsources all manufacturing, they can't change the whole line at once. It's a real strain to release more than two or three models at a time.

Also, I don't expect iBooks to get G4s because of the heat issue, unless 7457's come out.

Here's my guestimated schedule, YMMV:
6/03 - PowerMac 970 tower, single/dual processors. (Not called G5; it would make G3's look too old.)
8/03 - iMac 970 (single processor).
8/03 - iBook 1GHz G3.
1/04 - PowerBook 970 in all three sizes.
3/04 - iBook 1.2GHz G3, or 7457 if they are available.
3/04 - eMac gets 7457 if available, or is discontinued.

[Snowy_River]

Originally posted by xenotek
so i'm thinking of purchasing one of those spiffy powerbooks for college. if i buy the 17inch one now, would it still be top of the line by september, or should i expect an update before then? if anyone has any thoughts or suggestions, i would really appreciate it. thanks!

Personally, I would strongly recommend waiting for the moment. Everyone can give you advice about what they think is going to happen, but know one really knows.

It seems very, very likely that there is a new chip about to be released, and it may or may not be released in the PowerBook line along side the PowerMac line. If you buy a PowerBook now, and the 970s are released in next generation PowerBooks in a couple of months, you know that you'll be kicking yourself.

As I said, I'd strongly recommend waiting at least until the WWDC.

[eph310]

1. Aluminum housing/better design.
2. Airport Extreme
3. Bluetooth built-in
4. Better Ram
5. 4200/100 Hard drive not 4200/66
6. BACKLIT KEYBOARD (coolness factor)
7. Two firewire ports (400/400 or 800/400), one for camera and one for external drive
8. Remains the same price as it is in Titanium!!!!

What do you think the new specs will be on the 15"? Will they be identical to the 17" specs (minus the screen size)? What is likely to be left off the list? And supposing the changes are made, what will distinguish it from the 17" other than the screen? Will this bring the 17" down in price? AND...

When will the 15" be updated?

[D*I*S_Frontman]

Before I make my comments, I would like to declare my underlying assumptions:

1) a 970 dual AlBook would also have improved FSB speed and could address 2 GB RAM minimum

2) in real-world testing, the 970 AlBook dualie would outperform the current 1.42 DP tower in every conceivable speed test and render video like a champ

3) Panther as 64bit native and taylor made for the 970's (future app compatability)


All that assumed, I would suggest:

Is $3700 an insane price for a laptop? Perhaps not...

A dual processor 970 17" AlBook would be a true "desktop replacement." With a FW800 RAID array of external drives (easily set up in OS X) a video editor could use the unit as his post studio machine and be productive--then unplug and go to make his final presentation (If he's flying home from a shoot, he captures his video in an offline format and has a scratch version edited and ready before the plane even lands).

If you need actual PCI card space for some tasks, just get a Magma chassis--You can have an entire TOWER of cards hooked up to your AlBook (Mac RT, ProTools, MOTU stuff, etc) through the CardBus slot.

You could spend $4k on a well config'd tower + 20" display AND buy a cheaper laptop for $2K more (for presentations, etc),

or

Buy the laptop for $4k and use the remaining $2k for your Magma chassis and related peripherals.

The benefit of two separate systems would be the ability to work on two separate projects at once, I suppose. But if you are ONE PERSON working on a system, that may not afford you much of an advantage. Having all of your applications in exactly the perfect configuration with you at all times is a blessing.

I have used my meek little Pismo 400 as my one and only system for two years now. Being able to unplug it from my peripherals and jam it into a bag and go--man, that is a dream. No second system to keep sync'ed with the first... all my emails, applications, and documents travelling with me... the WORLD being my "home office" environment. Those kind of simple conveniences add up to make portable computing EXREMELY appealing, no matter the price or performance hit.

For home users who want to surf the net and play Quake, it doesn't make any sense, but to the independent or corporate businessman it may be a perfectly logical choice. How much PRODUCTIVE WORK (i.e., what your clients PAY you to do) you can get accomplished is more important than raw ghz to $ ratios. Paying an extra $1-2k for complete portability might seem foolhardy--but if the result nets you even ONE additional client per YEAR, you have more than made up the difference.