PDA

View Full Version : PowerBooks Updates?




MacRumors
Jun 6, 2003, 12:10 AM
And unconfirmed/anonymous submission claims that the Powerbook line will see speed bumps on June 24th @ 9am at North Beach (@ WWDC).

That timeslot (http://developer.apple.com/wwdc/tuesday.html) is available and scheduled as 'To Be Announced", but would be an unusual time for such an event... as Jobs' keynote is the day before (http://developer.apple.com/wwdc/monday.html) at 10am.



akushlan
Jun 6, 2003, 12:29 AM
I don't think that it can be anything major given the timeslot. Probably just bringing the 12" up to speed with the other two. I doubt we will see a 15" alBook before a major upgrade of the line. Just my crazy opinion.:rolleyes: yeah right! I'm hoping for a revamped 15":D

ianimate3d
Jun 6, 2003, 12:38 AM
This sounds unlikely unless what Jobs has to announce is so phenomenal that it will make these bumps seem like nothing. (let's hope!)

joelc
Jun 6, 2003, 01:16 AM
Well, it doesn't look like they'll be announcing a 970 PB in that time, anyway. Some people have thought that was possible...We can hope, but if they do, it won't be what that timeslot is

shadowfax
Jun 6, 2003, 01:22 AM
i believe the going rumor is speed bumps plus 15 inch albook. that's what was in the original submission. definitely not gonna see 970s in powerbooks at wwdc.

QCassidy352
Jun 6, 2003, 01:41 AM
powerbook rumor #8632... I'll file it in the pile with the rest of them. :)

shadowfax
Jun 6, 2003, 01:55 AM
this one seems more like a "duh" rumor to me than anything else. i mean, they really have to update those powerbooks. why not just do it with everything else--Panther, presumably 970 PMacs... it all fits.

trebblekicked
Jun 6, 2003, 02:19 AM
if we are getting the updates during WWDC, they'll be part of jobs' warm up. you know the routine, blah blah OS X has so many new users, blah blah safari blah blah 15" powerbook, and oh yeah...new dual 1.8 Ghz powermacs!...(mob rushes the stage) What?

shadowfax
Jun 6, 2003, 02:28 AM
Originally posted by trebblekicked
if we are getting the updates during WWDC, they'll be part of jobs' warm up. you know the routine, blah blah OS X has so many new users, blah blah safari blah blah 15" powerbook, and oh yeah...new dual 1.8 Ghz powermacs!...(mob rushes the stage) What? i hope we don't get excited about that. or is that what you mean, that they will mob him in violent anger?

how long is steve's keynote? will he really have time to show us everything?

MacBandit
Jun 6, 2003, 02:34 AM
Originally posted by Shadowfax
i hope we don't get excited about that. or is that what you mean, that they will mob him in violent anger?

how long is steve's keynote? will he really have time to show us everything?

We should get excited it he announced dual/1.8GHz Powermacs. Those would be the top of the line 970s.

In any case I have said it once and I'll say it again. It goes against everything ever set down by Apple to announce Powerbooks at a developer conference. If they do announce them it will be before or after not at the conference. He may go over them again at the conference but as a side note as a bunch of developers could care less for a minor update to the Powerbooks. If they were to announce hardware at the WWDC it would be PowerMacs and I don't see that happening for a couple months yet.

shadowfax
Jun 6, 2003, 02:37 AM
Originally posted by MacBandit
We should get excited it he announced dual/1.8GHz Powermacs. Those would be the top of the line 970s. *slaps forehead* sorry, i was thinking he meant a G4 speedbump, as he didn't say 970 at all, but i guess 1.8 is the clockrate they will be at. it's too bad it couldn't be more. i can't help but wonder how even dualies will benchmark with non-64 bit software at 1.8 GHz. we'll have to see what apple does!

cb911
Jun 6, 2003, 06:47 AM
i don't know if this rumors is all that much of a help... i mean everyone will be watching WWDC anyway for mention of the 970 and Panther.

and if Apple releases all of this new hardware at a Developers Conference, won't this be bad in the sense that the hardware (OK, maybe only the PowerBooks) could have a seperate release date, and then leave the WWDC to more "Developer" sort of content. some might start thinking that Apple doesn't have enough "Developer" content to fill the whole of WWDC.

Panther
Jun 6, 2003, 07:03 AM
Originally posted by MacBandit
In any case I have said it once and I'll say it again. It goes against everything ever set down by Apple to announce Powerbooks at a developer conference.... except that this is "The Year of the Notebook" :p

Sun Baked
Jun 6, 2003, 07:04 AM
The PowerBooks seem to be leaning towards speed bumps with the intoduction of the new Powerbook 15.

The PowerBook 15 most likely a smaller version of the 17" big brother.

While the PowerBook 12 continues to take over as the G4 replacement of the iBook (as we watch the iBook slowly drifting off into oblivion.)

---

Just based on the strange marketing choices Apple has made lately.

Should be interesting to see the PowerBooks all finally boosted above 1GHz.

Remember this is all a guess, I'm waiting for MacOSRumors to post before I change my mind...

hvfsl
Jun 6, 2003, 08:13 AM
I still see no problem with a PPC970 Powerbook at WWDC. They require less power and are cheaper than the G4, they could just be clocked at something like 1.2GGhz.

But of course a PPC970 PB is only posible if the Apple adopting PPC970 rumors are true. There is some evidence to suggest that Apple may in fact not be adopting the PPC970 but continuing with the G4 or using a different chip. Remember Intel and AMD both have 64bit chips that are almost ready for release or have already been released.

Apple would have had plenty of time to get a PPC970 PB ready. Also Apple is going to update all of the powerbook product lines, this is obvious by the recent reductions in the prices around the world. Also the 17in model has not been reduced in price because Apple said it is still selling very well.

dongmin
Jun 6, 2003, 08:19 AM
Sorry to deflate the 970-in-PowerBook crowd, but it's looking more and more like the update will be minor, just bringing the 15" in features parity with the other PBs. So it's just as well that the update doesn't get much publicity.

JBracy
Jun 6, 2003, 08:29 AM
I wonder if they might expand the line even more - ie:

<12" Sub notebook (No optical, few ports, docking port like duo maybe? Or even a tablet?)
12" powerbook
14" Powerbook
15.4" Powerbook
17" Powerbook

Just a thought, but it is half way through the "Year of the Notebook" and Apple haven't really done much since January.

JBracy
Jun 6, 2003, 08:37 AM
Originally posted by dongmin
Sorry to deflate the 970-in-PowerBook crowd, but it's looking more and more like the update will be minor, just bringing the 15" in features parity with the other PBs. So it's just as well that the update doesn't get much publicity.

How can anyone say "it's looking more and more like...." No one knows anything! It's a rumor - pure simple speculation. Only a few people at Apple know who, what, where, when, how or why.

hvfsl
Jun 6, 2003, 08:42 AM
Originally posted by dongmin
Sorry to deflate the 970-in-PowerBook crowd, but it's looking more and more like the update will be minor, just bringing the 15" in features parity with the other PBs. So it's just as well that the update doesn't get much publicity.

Apple is not going to update just the 15in PB, but also the 12in and the 17in, which means the speed updates will not be minor. Apple never lowers prices accross a range (except for the 17in) unless they are bringing something new out soon. The only other time Apple lowers prices is when they release a new product or product update and sell it for less than the last model.

-hh
Jun 6, 2003, 09:27 AM
Originally posted by JBracy
I wonder if they might expand the line even more - ie:

<12" Sub notebook (No optical, few ports, docking port like duo maybe? Or even a tablet?)
...
Just a thought, but it is half way through the "Year of the Notebook" and Apple haven't really done much since January.

Personally, I don't see that much of a reason to go to anything appreciably smaller than the current 12", unless its going to be the size of a PDA.

And you're right - - for claims of "Year of the Laptop", as nice as the 12" and 17" can be considered, that was a half lightyear ago. Need something here, as well as something again before the end of the year.



-hh

ffakr
Jun 6, 2003, 09:58 AM
Apple won't expand the powerbook line to include a 14" model. It doesn't make any sense. It won't draw more buyers... it will just increase R&D and production/inventory costs. Also... the one GREAT thing that Amelio did was trim the Apple product line. Before Amelio, there were like over 20 Macs.. buyers didn't know what to get and Apples costs were too high. Amelio was a busness man (not just a Koolaid drinker), he made some important reforms that were absolutely crutial for the coming SJ golden years. ;-)

I think Apple's going to bump the Powerbook line to the 7457 processor. We'll get a bus speed increase, a power/heat decrease, and a speed bump.
We'll see 1.2ish, maybe up to 1.4 max in the powerbooks... and it will be done with a better power profile. Apple might offer a tolken increase in estimated battery life too.. just to point out 'look, this is why you still get a G4 in your notebooks'

The argument about underclocked 970s consuming less power than G4s, is only accurate for the 7455 processors. It isn't true for the 7457 processors that Motorola announced (at 1.33GHz) months ago. All around, the 7457 is a better mobile processor at this time: cooler, better bandwidth than we have now (though still not enough), and it should be pretty fast for just about everything a mobile user needs (especially with that 512K L2 cache).

....ffakr

maradong
Jun 6, 2003, 10:12 AM
well still the ppc 970 and pb rumors.
i m still praying every evening to see a pb with 970 cpu @ wwcd. but it s really improbable i guess about 20 %.

GrizzlyHippo
Jun 6, 2003, 10:17 AM
Originally posted by dongmin
Sorry to deflate the 970-in-PowerBook crowd, but it's looking more and more like the update will be minor, just bringing the 15" in features parity with the other PBs. So it's just as well that the update doesn't get much publicity.

These Powerbook rumors are getting tiresome, but if as you say the 15" will be a simple and minor update, why wasn't it launched a couple of months ago?

I think you will be proved wrong. I'm not saying the PB's will all go to 970's (although that would be nice) but if they have held off the 15 for 6 months after the 12 and 17 were launched then I think the range will be significantly updated.

Just my thoughts, but they make sense to me!!

Grizzly

dongmin
Jun 6, 2003, 11:11 AM
Originally posted by JBracy
How can anyone say "it's looking more and more like...." No one knows anything! It's a rumor - pure simple speculation. Only a few people at Apple know who, what, where, when, how or why.

Duh. Yes, it's all rumors. But we can make guesses as to which are more likely. All I'm saying is that, based on a few recent rumors, a 970 PB update is not likely at this time. Plus, given what we know about the 970, I don't think it's ready for a laptop.


Originally posted by hvfsl
Apple is not going to update just the 15in PB, but also the 12in and the 17in, which means the speed updates will not be minor. Apple never lowers prices accross a range (except for the 17in) unless they are bringing something new out soon. The only other time Apple lowers prices is when they release a new product or product update and sell it for less than the last model.

Why do you think the 17" will be updated. It's been shipping for less than 3 months. And this is a brand new spanking design. If there is a major upgrade, it's gonna be with a G4 7457 which is pin-compatible with the 7455. It won't take on a brand new motherboard and case modification to accomodate the 970.

For the record:
15.2"--introduced in Nov. 6, 2002 (7 months ago); shipped immediately (??)
12"--introduced Jan. 7, 2003 (5 months ago); shipped immediately
17"--introduced Jan. 7, but did not ship until mid March (under 3 months)

5-7 months between product updates is about the norm for Apple which makes sense for updates to the 12" and 15" line--hence, the current promotions.

I say the PBs will only see minor updates b/c I simply don't think there are any new chips ready to go into the PBs. The G4 7455 is pretty much at it's limit at 1 ghz (at the core voltage suitable for a laptop). The G4 7457 is possible in the 1.3 ghz range but I say it's too soon knowning Moto's record. The 970 is simply not suited to go into a laptop until it goes into a .09 process for reasons (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?postid=337846#post337846) discussed before.

pretentious
Jun 6, 2003, 11:38 AM
Didn't Apple release the first generation of the Wallstreet PowerBooks at WWDC? Is it so hard to think that they would do it again?

The Powerbooks are their biggest sellers, and from what we have been reading, with Apple wanting to quickly move to the 970 for everything, I don't think its so hard to fathom a PB-PM 970 release, it will make the anoucement even bigger and show Apple's commitment to their next generation chip to all the developers.

mxpiazza
Jun 6, 2003, 12:12 PM
Originally posted by hvfsl
Apple is not going to update just the 15in PB, but also the 12in and the 17in, which means the speed updates will not be minor. Apple never lowers prices accross a range (except for the 17in) unless they are bringing something new out soon. The only other time Apple lowers prices is when they release a new product or product update and sell it for less than the last model.

exactly, someone who finally looks into the facts, which can be a breath of fresh air in these forums...

so everyone can stop their guessing, the reason why the 17" price wasn't dropped is stated in this CNN article:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/biztec...reut/index.html

in short: "... Joswiak said that Apple did not cut the price of the 17-inch PowerBook because it was still a good value at that cost.

"It's going strong at that price," Joswiak said. "It's been selling very well." "

hope this clears some stuff up...

no matter what, we'll be getting some sort of nice update at WWDC, so we should be happy either way... let's not start calling for heads now. but i'm still waiting for my 15" 970 :D

BTW... has anyone been over to the education store lately? if you buy a laptop and iPod together by Sept. 23rd, you get a mail in rebate for $200... that's a sweet deal, considering the substantial discounts you're already getting in the education store.

JBracy
Jun 6, 2003, 12:14 PM
Originally posted by dongmin
Duh. Yes, it's all rumors. But we can make guesses as to which are more likely. All I'm saying is that, based on a few recent rumors, a 970 PB update is not likely at this time. Plus, given what we know about the 970, I don't think it's ready for a laptop.

Why? What do you KNOW about the 970? All I KNOW is that it is slightly (>10%) Larger, cooler, uses less power (19w@1.2GHz vs 23w@1.0GHz) and faster.

Sounds like a good candidate for a laptop to me.

The big question is did Apple design the current Laptops with the 970 in mind and release them with the G4 as a stop gap, or do they need to redesign the motherboard? I personally think the former, but I guess we'll all find out.

Winston Smith
Jun 6, 2003, 12:28 PM
Originally posted by QCassidy352
powerbook rumor #8632... I'll file it in the pile with the rest of them. :)

Would that be the pile on your Panther desktop?

dguisinger
Jun 6, 2003, 12:42 PM
Originally posted by JBracy
Why? What do you KNOW about the 970? All I KNOW is that it is slightly (>10%) Larger, cooler, uses less power (19w@1.2GHz vs 23w@1.0GHz) and faster.

Sounds like a good candidate for a laptop to me.

The big question is did Apple design the current Laptops with the 970 in mind and release them with the G4 as a stop gap, or do they need to redesign the motherboard? I personally think the former, but I guess we'll all find out.

Processor sockets are not compatible between the 970 and the G4. Infact the bus signalling isn't either.

However people should keep in mind, IBM announced a 1.2GHz version of the chip. IBM has announced their blade servers will run at 1.6GHz - 2.0GHz. So I ask you, why make a 1.2GHz chip? If what everyone says is true...that Apple needs to wait for IBM to shrink the process late this year to get a better notebook chip...then why would IBM be producing a 1.2GHz chip?

Also, remember, PowerBook rumors seem to be the hardest to get accurately. Remember when Arn received the 12" and 17" rumor? Less than 12 hours before release..... This could be something big and we wouldn't hear about it.

Also, anyone with a 17" power book know how big the motherboard is? My guess would be it is small enough to fit in a 15" powerbook without modification....which then begs the question why didn't the 15" ever get released? Understanding that Apple had too many 15" books in the channel would make sense, and Apple would not have lost much R&D by failing to update the book with a chassis only update.

If the same holds true, I could see the 15" and 17" going 970, because they could share a board. If Apple is going to spend R&D on building the new chipsets & motherboards, makes no difference to them if they do it now or later......infact, because AMD delayed their desktop Athlon 64 until late summer, this would give Apple a nice size claim to fame. Not only are we first to market on 64-bit consumer desktops, but we are first to market on 64-bit consumer laptops as well.

The 12" will probably not see any changes, and fill in a gap in their lineup. Eventually, you will see a 970 in the 12", with the 12" G4 motherboard being demoted to the iBook line, as I am sure they could use the 12" board (since it has no DVI) on both the 12" & 14" iBooks without modification to anything other than the iBook chassis. Talk about R&D well spent for Apple.

ffakr
Jun 6, 2003, 12:47 PM
Originally posted by pretentious
Didn't Apple release the first generation of the Wallstreet PowerBooks at WWDC? Is it so hard to think that they would do it again?

The Powerbooks are their biggest sellers, and from what we have been reading, with Apple wanting to quickly move to the 970 for everything, I don't think its so hard to fathom a PB-PM 970 release, it will make the anoucement even bigger and show Apple's commitment to their next generation chip to all the developers.

I believe that's inaccurate. Apple doesn't sell more portables than desktops (though the ratio is moving that way, especially because of the relatively slow desktops)
I belive you are getting confused with apple's relative market share. Apple owns a larger percentage of the Laptop Personal Computer sales... compared to the overall percentage of market share (sales) in the generic PC category.

JBracy
Jun 6, 2003, 12:48 PM
Originally posted by dguisinger
Processor sockets are not compatible between the 970 and the G4. Infact the bus signalling isn't either.

I know that, but how dificult would it be for Apple to design the motherboard for the 970 and then make minor modifications to allow it to use a G4 for the time being?

I am actually asking the question. I don't know the first thing about motherboard design. All I know from looking at the 1.2 GHZ 970 spec is that it is only slightly bigger than a G4, uses less power is faster and cooler. It looks like a good option for a Laptop. But Apple would not have wasted the R&D on the 17" if it was going to scrap it in 6 months time - UNLESS it would only need minor modification.

JBracy
Jun 6, 2003, 12:50 PM
Originally posted by ffakr
I believe that's inaccurate. Apple doesn't sell more portables than desktops (though the ratio is moving that way, especially because of the relatively slow desktops)
I belive you are getting confused with apple's relative market share. Apple owns a larger percentage of the Laptop Personal Computer sales... compared to the overall percentage of market share (sales) in the generic PC category.

Actually the figure is almost 50/50 (45/55 maybe) but apple makes more money on a Laptop than on a desktop - the margins are very high

dguisinger
Jun 6, 2003, 12:57 PM
Originally posted by JBracy
I know that, but how dificult would it be for Apple to design the motherboard for the 970 and then make minor modifications to allow it to use a G4 for the time being?

I am actually asking the question. I don't know the first thing about motherboard design. All I know from looking at the 1.2 GHZ 970 spec is that it is only slightly bigger than a G4, uses less power is faster and cooler. It looks like a good option for a Laptop. But Apple would not have wasted the R&D on the 17" if it was going to scrap it in 6 months time - UNLESS it would only need minor modification.

Extreamly difficult. However todays board design programs are great. Apple could design 90% of the board, and tell the program to lock the layout into place, and then only change the remainder of the board design for the 970. It would cut down on R&D.

Sun Baked
Jun 6, 2003, 01:32 PM
Originally posted by dguisinger
Also, anyone with a 17" power book know how big the motherboard is? My guess would be it is small enough to fit in a 15" powerbook without modification....which then begs the question why didn't the 15" ever get released? Understanding that Apple had too many 15" books in the channel would make sense, and Apple would not have lost much R&D by failing to update the book with a chassis only update. My assumption until I saw the inside of the PB 17, I still expect the same board to be used -- except it'll be a different layout and flow around the internals of the new PB 15.

The PB 12 is a different logic board and really seems to replace the iBook's niche.

Though I'd guess that the iBook will still be around and follow the same path as the old CRT iMac and provide the education market with new OS 9 machine for another year (along with the eMac).

evilsprung
Jun 6, 2003, 02:32 PM
If this rumor proves true it would literally kill me. I got my pb relatively 2 1/2 months ago and even then I was hesistant that Apple would make some kind of changes. A price drop I was expecting, but a price drop and a speed boost. damniit!

redAPPLE
Jun 6, 2003, 04:42 PM
ok guys... let's slow down for a second...

if i have my information correct, Apple usually upgrades their desktops first(!?) (processor-wise), then the notebooks...

although, it would be a great dream to have a 970 notebook within 3 weeks (it might be announced anyways...)... is this realistic?

if Apple's strategy is to make the 17" king of the notebook hill, then the 15" may not have more speed than the 17", logical?

so, my take, 17" special edition (maybe speed-bumped) and a 15" albook.

hvfsl
Jun 6, 2003, 05:32 PM
Apple always updates the powerbooks this time of year as well. The powerbook G3/G4s have always had an update this time of year.

neutrino23
Jun 6, 2003, 06:16 PM
Originally posted by dguisinger

However people should keep in mind, IBM announced a 1.2GHz version of the chip. IBM has announced their blade servers will run at 1.6GHz - 2.0GHz. So I ask you, why make a 1.2GHz chip? If what everyone says is true...that Apple needs to wait for IBM to shrink the process late this year to get a better notebook chip...then why would IBM be producing a 1.2GHz chip?


Generally, the speed number bandied about is the highest speed available. However, when chips are manufactured there is always a spread of performances available on each wafer. It could be that IBM would select the chips on each wafer that are appropriate for a powerbook. These might not be the fastest chips, but they would have the lowest power consumption.

Also, even though a chip could possibly run at 1.6GHz (for example) it will use less power if the clock is scaled back(1.2GHz for example). In such a case the PB designer would make a trade off between performance, battery drain and heat emitted by the chips.

NicoMan
Jun 6, 2003, 06:25 PM
Originally posted by dguisinger
why didn't the 15" ever get released? Understanding that Apple had too many 15" books in the channel would make sense, and Apple would not have lost much R&D by failing to update the book with a chassis only update.

You are also forgetting OS9 booting. The TiBook is the only one of the three that can. If Quark comes out OSX-native (maybe around WWDC), Apple will use it as a pretext for a OSX-only laptop line.


NicoMan

dswoodley
Jun 6, 2003, 06:35 PM
Originally posted by Sun Baked


While the PowerBook 12 continues to take over as the G4 replacement of the iBook (as we watch the iBook slowly drifting off into oblivion.)

-

Funny...Apple is still reporting it as a top seller...

NicoMan
Jun 6, 2003, 06:38 PM
Originally posted by neutrino23
Generally, the speed number bandied about is the highest speed available. However, when chips are manufactured there is always a spread of performances available on each wafer. It could be that IBM would select the chips on each wafer that are appropriate for a powerbook. These might not be the fastest chips, but they would have the lowest power consumption.

Also, even though a chip could possibly run at 1.6GHz (for example) it will use less power if the clock is scaled back(1.2GHz for example). In such a case the PB designer would make a trade off between performance, battery drain and heat emitted by the chips.

Basically, if you take all the chips out of the same wafer (waffer??), you need to test them to get a rating. The highest frequency for stable operations (allowing for some room, that extra bit that overclockers are so fond of) is the rating of the chip. In general, the higher the rating the higher the price for the chip. Now if I am not mistaken, if you 'underclock' a 1.6GHz down to 1.2 GHz (through lower voltage or something), you will get a chip with the same properties as the one that was rated at 1.2GHz. The point is, the PowerBooks' chips will probably be those who have failed the highest tests.

NicoMan

Sun Baked
Jun 6, 2003, 07:24 PM
Originally posted by dswoodley
Funny...Apple is still reporting it as a top seller... Twisted logic based on a couple data points... and projecting Apple's current marketing stategy a year into the future.

Steve Jobs usually play havoc with those predictions, and the 970 looming on the horizon can only make those worse.

But that's also looking at the current machines as we now know them.

dswoodley
Jun 6, 2003, 07:44 PM
Originally posted by Sun Baked
Twisted logic based on a couple data points... and projecting Apple's current marketing stategy a year into the future.

Steve Jobs usually play havoc with those predictions, and the 970 looming on the horizon can only make those worse.

But that's also looking at the current machines as we now know them.

Possibly...and maybe we're saying the same thing, but Apple is never going to abandon its consumer line - and that means the iBook ain't going anywhere and neither is the G3 in it

WM.
Jun 6, 2003, 08:14 PM
Originally posted by ffakr
Also... the one GREAT thing that Amelio did was trim the Apple product line. Before Amelio, there were like over 20 Macs.. buyers didn't know what to get and Apples costs were too high. Amelio was a busness man (not just a Koolaid drinker), he made some important reforms that were absolutely crutial for the coming SJ golden years. ;-)
Uh, no. I don't know what that wink is for (if it means that whole paragraph was in jest then ignore this), but when people talk about "over 20 Macs" they are talking about the Amelio era. SJ was the one who chopped the product grid way down, to 2x2. (Of course, it's since expanded to include the eMac and Xserve, but at least we don't have the 5300, 5300c, 5300cs...I still don't know what the difference was!)

I think Apple's going to bump the Powerbook line to the 7457 processor. We'll get a bus speed increase, a power/heat decrease, and a speed bump.
We'll see 1.2ish, maybe up to 1.4 max in the powerbooks... and it will be done with a better power profile. Apple might offer a tolken increase in estimated battery life too.. just to point out 'look, this is why you still get a G4 in your notebooks'

The argument about underclocked 970s consuming less power than G4s, is only accurate for the 7455 processors. It isn't true for the 7457 processors that Motorola announced (at 1.33GHz) months ago. All around, the 7457 is a better mobile processor at this time: cooler, better bandwidth than we have now (though still not enough), and it should be pretty fast for just about everything a mobile user needs (especially with that 512K L2 cache).
There's only one catch: it's not shipping for another three months AT LEAST.

WM

Sun Baked
Jun 6, 2003, 08:24 PM
Originally posted by WM.
There's only one catch: it's not shipping for another three months AT LEAST.

WM Hmmm... if you look at the second 7455 series the Rev 3.3, it wasn't supposed to be shipping until THIS month.

Yet it's been in all the new PowerBooks for a quarter easily. ;)

If the 7457 is running on the same clock as the 7455B, maybe ... just maybe ... it's ready for Apple to drop into PowerBooks now.

This would be enough to lower the temps and bump the speeds to 1.0 GHz and 1.25 GHz easily.

DakotaGuy
Jun 6, 2003, 08:34 PM
I think we might get one more decent speed bump out of the 7455. Wasn't the 1.33Ghz in the xServe designed to run cooler because of the smaller enclosure? With some modification it would probably work fine in a Powerbook. I remember when Powerbooks were only 550Mhz and everyone said they would never get to 1Ghz because of heat. Well they have scaled with little problems, so I think a 1.33 Ghz is completely do-able. That would be rocking for a laptop!

LSP
Jun 6, 2003, 08:41 PM
Powerbooks, imacs, powermacs and ibooks all showing 30 day delivery times. Either a big mistake or a big change coming.

juniormaj
Jun 6, 2003, 08:58 PM
Originally posted by WM.
... but at least we don't have the 5300, 5300c, 5300cs...I still don't know what the difference was!)

The difference was:
5300=Greyscale screen
5300c=Color Screen (Active Matrix, 16bit color)
5300cs=Color Screen (Passive Matrix, Dual Scan, 8bit color)

The better, more expensive 5300c had a "c" for "color".
The cheaper 5300cs had a "c" for color and I always thought the "s" stood for the word "scan" in "dual scan", but it may have been something else.

There was also a 5300e with a faster processor and more memory/storage. I guess maybe the "e" stood for "extra"?

Yes, there were too many models of every kind of Mac back then. What about all those Performas? Yikes.

WM.
Jun 6, 2003, 09:13 PM
Originally posted by Sun Baked
Hmmm... if you look at the second 7455 series the Rev 3.3, it wasn't supposed to be shipping until THIS month.

Yet it's been in all the new PowerBooks for a quarter easily. ;)
I have to admit that I haven't been checking out all those Moto PDFs about the G4 roadmap (aside from that one about the "small developers conference" or somesuch). So I wasn't aware that there was a G4 version actually *gasp* shipping early.

I still don't think the 7447/7457 will materialize before Q4 (which was the last word from Motorola AFAIK).

Thanks for the clarification/correction.

WM

WM.
Jun 6, 2003, 09:23 PM
Originally posted by juniormaj
The difference was:
5300=Greyscale screen
5300c=Color Screen (Active Matrix, 16bit color)
5300cs=Color Screen (Passive Matrix, Dual Scan, 8bit color)

The better, more expensive 5300c had a "c" for "color".
The cheaper 5300cs had a "c" for color and I always thought the "s" stood for the word "scan" in "dual scan", but it may have been something else.
That's roughly what I thought, although it's been so long that I wasn't sure. :)

But I think this only further illustrates my point about the complexity of the line--sometimes, added letters after the number meant "better", and sometimes they meant "worse". Weren't there also multiple revisions of each model (e.g. the 5300c was upgraded at some point)?

There was also a 5300e with a faster processor and more memory/storage. I guess maybe the "e" stood for "extra"?
I thought so!! But I didn't want to include it for fear of being wrong. :)

Was there a 5300ce too?

Yes, there were too many models of every kind of Mac back then. What about all those Performas? Yikes.

Oh, those were the days. We've got two 6400/180s, still going strong. I think the 611x series (from '94 or so) was even worse...about eight different models with different numbers after 611 that didn't really mean anything...

Anyway, lemme see if I can remember all the '96/'97 Performas (without cheating and checking apple-history.com): 6360/160, 6400/180, 6400/200, 6400/200 with the internal Zip drive (I think it had a totally different logic board), 6500/225, 6500/250, 6500/275, 6500/300, 6500/350...and then all the 5x00s with roughly the same MHz ratings. Slightly before that we had the POS 62x0, 63x0 (but the 6360 wasn't nearly as bad), 52x0, and 53x0.

Ah, nostalgia. :)

WM

mxpiazza
Jun 6, 2003, 11:16 PM
Originally posted by redAPPLE
ok guys... let's slow down for a second...

if i have my information correct, Apple usually upgrades their desktops first(!?) (processor-wise), then the notebooks...

although, it would be a great dream to have a 970 notebook within 3 weeks (it might be announced anyways...)... is this realistic?

if Apple's strategy is to make the 17" king of the notebook hill, then the 15" may not have more speed than the 17", logical?

so, my take, 17" special edition (maybe speed-bumped) and a 15" albook.
it seems as if your memory only extends as far back to the release of the G4. when apple released the G3 processor (which is a much more suitable comparison to the 970 release than is the G4), desktops and notebooks were both announced and released at the *same* time. throw in the 'year of the laptop' buisness as well as the fact that the 15" PB is loooong overdue for an update (apple is obviously waiting for something ...cough, wwdc, cough...), it is looking like there is a great possibility that we just may see the 970 not only announced in a few weeks, but announced for apple's powerbook line. let's just cross our fingers...

gocanon
Jun 7, 2003, 12:27 AM
Originally posted by LSP
Powerbooks, imacs, powermacs and ibooks all showing 30 day delivery times. Either a big mistake or a big change coming.

Where are you seeing this?

solvs
Jun 7, 2003, 06:32 AM
Originally posted by WM.
Oh, those were the days. We've got two 6400/180s, still going strong.

Ah, nostalgia. :)


Still got a working 6400/200. My P1 166 PC died years ago.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

--Benjamin Franklin

BTW, love the sig. Still rings true (now more than ever).

dongmin
Jun 7, 2003, 07:43 AM
Originally posted by JBracy
Why? What do you KNOW about the 970? All I KNOW is that it is slightly (>10%) Larger, cooler, uses less power (19w@1.2GHz vs 23w@1.0GHz) and faster.

Sounds like a good candidate for a laptop to me.


For the last frickin time, the 970 does NOT run cooler than a G4 at the same clock speed.


From a Motorola document (http://e-www.motorola.com/brdata/PDFDB/docs/PPCSALESFACT.pdf) (page 5):

7455-L (rev 3.3): 15.0 watts at 1.0 ghz
7457-N: 7.5 watts at 1.0 ghz
7457-L: 16.6 watts at 1.3 ghz


From a IBM document (http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/A1387A29AC1C2AE087256C5200611780/$file/PPC970_MPF2002.pdf):

970 (1.1v): 19 watts at 1.2 ghz
970 (1.3v): 43 watts at 1.8 ghz


so at 1.0 ghz, the 970 will run at 16 watts. Yes it's close, but it's not cooler! And to put in a 1.2 ghz 970 would represent 27% increase in power dissipation.

DHagan4755
Jun 7, 2003, 10:46 AM
Could this be the reason that Apple is now using a Lithium Prismatic battery (in their 17-inch) ?

MacBandit
Jun 7, 2003, 12:50 PM
Originally posted by dongmin
For the last frickin time, the 970 does NOT run cooler than a G4 at the same clock speed.


From a Motorola document (http://e-www.motorola.com/brdata/PDFDB/docs/PPCSALESFACT.pdf) (page 5):

7455-L (rev 3.3): 15.0 watts at 1.0 ghz
7457-N: 7.5 watts at 1.0 ghz
7457-L: 16.6 watts at 1.3 ghz


From a IBM document (http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/A1387A29AC1C2AE087256C5200611780/$file/PPC970_MPF2002.pdf):

970 (1.1v): 19 watts at 1.2 ghz
970 (1.3v): 43 watts at 1.8 ghz


so at 1.0 ghz, the 970 will run at 16 watts. Yes it's close, but it's not cooler! And to put in a 1.2 ghz 970 would represent 27% increase in power dissipation.

It would be good to say that these specs you quote are all normal/typical power consumption and all them could use higher. The usage most people are use to throwing around for the 7455 is 22watts MAXIMUM power consumption for the 1GHz model. Also the 19watts for the PPC970 is as I said normal usage but it's only a projected number. They haven't published an actual tested number.

Sun Baked
Jun 7, 2003, 12:57 PM
Originally posted by MacBandit
It would be good to say that these specs you quote are all normal/typical power consumption and all them could use higher. The usage most people are use to throwing around for the 7455 is 22watts MAXIMUM power consumption for the 1GHz model. Also the 19watts for the PPC970 is as I said normal usage but it's only a projected number. They haven't published an actual tested number.

Motorola 7457 1GHz

Full Power Mode
Typical 7.5W
Maximum 12.5W

Deep Sleep Mode
Typical 2.0W

Lanbrown
Jun 7, 2003, 04:19 PM
Originally posted by hvfsl
But of course a PPC970 PB is only posible if the Apple adopting PPC970 rumors are true. There is some evidence to suggest that Apple may in fact not be adopting the PPC970 but continuing with the G4 or using a different chip. Remember Intel and AMD both have 64bit chips that are almost ready for release or have already been released.

Yes, but Apple would have to redo all of their software. The AMD and Intel are not compatible with each other, let alone the PowerPC. The PowerPC is not compatible with the Sun Ultra SPARC as well. Just like none of the above are compatible with the MIPS. The list goes on and on. Apple will not abandon the PowerPC, IBM hasn’t and neither has Motorola.

Before anyone mentions it. Yes, the Itanic has compatibility built-in to support X86 32-bit code, but is rather slow running it.

ffakr
Jun 7, 2003, 10:32 PM
Originally posted by WM.
Uh, no. I don't know what that wink is for (if it means that whole paragraph was in jest then ignore this), but when people talk about "over 20 Macs" they are talking about the Amelio era. SJ was the one who chopped the product grid way down, to 2x2.

No, the consolidation began with Amelio.
the reason he was hired was to perform Corporate Triage, to cut costs, to streamline.
He was forced out before he accomplished all his goals, but he was instrumental in the triming of the product line.

Think of the introduction of the of the Beige G3. SJ was all over that, but the G3 was launched November 10th, 1997, and Amelio resigned on July 9, 1997. You think that the move to essentially one tower and one desktop for the 'pro' line was conceived and executed in one quarter? IMHO, the Beige G3 was the first real move to a more unified product line. It brought Apple really down to one high end model. The tower and DT were the same computer with a different box.

WM.
Jun 8, 2003, 12:12 AM
Originally posted by ffakr
No, the consolidation began with Amelio.
the reason he was hired was to perform Corporate Triage, to cut costs, to streamline.
He was forced out before he accomplished all his goals, but he was instrumental in the triming of the product line.

Think of the introduction of the of the Beige G3. SJ was all over that, but the G3 was launched November 10th, 1997, and Amelio resigned on July 9, 1997. You think that the move to essentially one tower and one desktop for the 'pro' line was conceived and executed in one quarter? IMHO, the Beige G3 was the first real move to a more unified product line. It brought Apple really down to one high end model. The tower and DT were the same computer with a different box.
You make a good point. However, hadn't SJ essentially been in control for a few months by July? I'm thinking there could have been projects to develop other models (like the six-slot Power Express) that he killed ASAP. I'm not claiming that the beige G3 was SJ's idea--the iMac was "his" first product--after all, it should've been pretty obvious (even to Amelio) to develop the beige G3.

When was Amelio first hired (as CEO), anyway? About '95, or even '94? Before the introduction of the PCI Power Macs, the most important part of the line (the Power Macs) was pretty simple (four models, IIRC). The Performa line was pretty complicated, as I've pointed out. But I think Amelio arguably presided over an increase in the complexity of the line. Certainly it took him at least two years to make any progress at all at trimming the hardware line.

Finally, when people talk about the "Dark Ages" of Apple, they're usually referring to '96 and '97: the Amelio era. Apple was losing money like crazy. The first profitable quarter in a long time ended at the beginning of 1998--I suppose you could argue that that was a result of Amelio's efforts--but then why couldn't he have made those changes two years earlier?

WM

ffakr
Jun 8, 2003, 10:25 AM
Originally posted by WM.
When was Amelio first hired (as CEO), anyway? About '95, or even '94? Before the introduction of the PCI Power Macs, the most important part of the line (the Power Macs) was pretty simple (four models, IIRC).
Well, I think the 7300, 7600, 8600, and 9600 were running concurrently... and there were variation in these lines... like the 8600 and the DualProcessors.

Finally, when people talk about the "Dark Ages" of Apple, they're usually referring to '96 and '97: the Amelio era. Apple was losing money like crazy. The first profitable quarter in a long time ended at the beginning of 1998--I suppose you could argue that that was a result of Amelio's efforts--but then why couldn't he have made those changes two years earlier?
Apple fans like to point out that, although the press sounds the death knell every few months, Apple seems to keep chugging. Amelio had shortcommings. I don't think that he could have brought Apple to the point it's at now... but without his efforts, Apple would have been either out of business or at the very least, it would have been trivialized out of existence. I'm not saying that Gil made Apple what it is today, but I think he reworked the foundation. sure, the finish carpenters get the props when the house is done... but they need a good foundation to build on.

I'll see if I can get the time to get a before, during, after product line breakdown for Amelio. I don't want to make a claim and not back it up.
:-)

MacBandit
Jun 8, 2003, 12:22 PM
Originally posted by ffakr
Well, I think the 7300, 7600, 8600, and 9600 were running concurrently... and there were variation in these lines... like the 8600 and the DualProcessors.

Apple fans like to point out that, although the press sounds the death knell every few months, Apple seems to keep chugging. Amelio had shortcommings. I don't think that he could have brought Apple to the point it's at now... but without his efforts, Apple would have been either out of business or at the very least, it would have been trivialized out of existence. I'm not saying that Gil made Apple what it is today, but I think he reworked the foundation. sure, the finish carpenters get the props when the house is done... but they need a good foundation to build on.

I'll see if I can get the time to get a before, during, after product line breakdown for Amelio. I don't want to make a claim and not back it up.
:-)

Well I just looked it up and Gil was CEO from 1996 - July of 1997 for a wopping 17months. In that time there was little time for him to affect hardware and in fact if you look x200 series PowerMacs came out in 1995 with PCI and a host of other changes. Durring Gils time there were no significant changes in the hardware time. Looking to soon after he left the G3 chip replaced the 603 and 604 chips but this was a natural unavoidable evolution of these processors. Also there was no change in design of the hardware they were still using the same case desings that they had for nearly a decade. Now the first full design change came with the iMac in May of 1998. Now you would think that maybe Gil had a hand in that but I really don't think so since Gil never really touched the hardware. Instead he did his best to make bad business decissions and to kill the developer community. If you don't believe me do a google search for Gil and Apple and read what has been written about his business practices at Apple and how things changed for Apple developers during his tenure. I believe the iMac was something that Steve had had in his mind for a quite a while I think that his love for Apple coomputers and the designing of them had never died and it was a simple matter when he came back in to build a design he had already layed out.

WM.
Jun 8, 2003, 10:03 PM
Originally posted by ffakr
Well, I think the 7300, 7600, 8600, and 9600 were running concurrently... and there were variation in these lines... like the 8600 and the DualProcessors.

Apple fans like to point out that, although the press sounds the death knell every few months, Apple seems to keep chugging. Amelio had shortcommings. I don't think that he could have brought Apple to the point it's at now... but without his efforts, Apple would have been either out of business or at the very least, it would have been trivialized out of existence. I'm not saying that Gil made Apple what it is today, but I think he reworked the foundation. sure, the finish carpenters get the props when the house is done... but they need a good foundation to build on.

I'll see if I can get the time to get a before, during, after product line breakdown for Amelio. I don't want to make a claim and not back it up.
:-)
I'd appreciate that. Thanks!

Originally posted by MacBandit
Well I just looked it up and Gil was CEO from 1996 - July of 1997 for a wopping 17months.
Wow, I definitely thought it was a lot longer than that! I think I disagree with ffakr slightly less now. :)

In that time there was little time for him to affect hardware and in fact if you look x200 series PowerMacs came out in 1995 with PCI and a host of other changes. Durring Gils time there were no significant changes in the hardware time. Looking to soon after he left the G3 chip replaced the 603 and 604 chips but this was a natural unavoidable evolution of these processors.
Yep. I think we're in agreement here. :)

Also there was no change in design of the hardware they were still using the same case desings that they had for nearly a decade. Now the first full design change came with the iMac in May of 1998. Now you would think that maybe Gil had a hand in that but I really don't think so since Gil never really touched the hardware.
I've seen it written that that was SJ's project, 100%. He threw down the gauntlet and got it developed in nine months.

Instead he did his best to make bad business decissions and to kill the developer community. If you don't believe me do a google search for Gil and Apple and read what has been written about his business practices at Apple and how things changed for Apple developers during his tenure. I believe the iMac was something that Steve had had in his mind for a quite a while I think that his love for Apple coomputers and the designing of them had never died and it was a simple matter when he came back in to build a design he had already layed out.
Agreed.

WM

JBracy
Jun 9, 2003, 09:02 AM
Originally posted by dongmin
For the last frickin time, the 970 does NOT run cooler than a G4 at the same clock speed.


From a Motorola document (http://e-www.motorola.com/brdata/PDFDB/docs/PPCSALESFACT.pdf) (page 5):

7455-L (rev 3.3): 15.0 watts at 1.0 ghz
7457-N: 7.5 watts at 1.0 ghz
7457-L: 16.6 watts at 1.3 ghz


From a IBM document (http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/A1387A29AC1C2AE087256C5200611780/$file/PPC970_MPF2002.pdf):

970 (1.1v): 19 watts at 1.2 ghz
970 (1.3v): 43 watts at 1.8 ghz


so at 1.0 ghz, the 970 will run at 16 watts. Yes it's close, but it's not cooler! And to put in a 1.2 ghz 970 would represent 27% increase in power dissipation.

Well the document I read (http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/A2CE393ABF2CE99787256D21006AE8A2/$file/PPC970_MPF_Review.pdf) lists the G4+ as 21.3 watts @ 1.0gHZ, and actually this document is not an IBM document but an independant review posted on IBM's website. Last time I checked 19 watts was cooler than 21.3.

Jason

JBracy
Jun 9, 2003, 09:18 AM
A friend just sent me apple's Quarterly employee promos (huge price drops - usually items they want to clear out before new items replace them) Included are:

all 15" PB's
all iBooks

all displays

1 gHz PowerMacs
dual 1.25 gHz PowerMacs

CRT iMac
combo and superdrive eMacs
15" iMacs

Looks like a big shakeup is about to happen!

shadowfax
Jun 9, 2003, 10:19 AM
Originally posted by JBracy
Well the document I read (http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/A2CE393ABF2CE99787256D21006AE8A2/$file/PPC970_MPF_Review.pdf) lists the G4+ as 21.3 watts @ 1.0gHZ, and actually this document is not an IBM document but an independant review posted on IBM's website. Last time I checked 19 watts was cooler than 21.3.

Jason even if it isn't, it would probably be OK to put a 970 in at least the 17 inch powerbook. in the grand scheme of things, the processor isn't using much power in comparison to the LCD and so on. the only thing is, apple really needs some centrino-esque technology, a processor that uses less than 10 watts for sure.

maybe IBM will put some powersaving features on these by the end of the year. i am sure that could cut power usage by a huge amount.

job
Jun 9, 2003, 10:22 AM
Originally posted by JBracy
A friend just sent me apple's Quarterly employee promos (huge price drops - usually items they want to clear out before new items replace them) Included are:

<snip>
CRT iMac
<snip>

Now why would they want to clear out something they've already discontinued?

JBracy
Jun 9, 2003, 10:27 AM
Because they still have a huge amunt of stock and want to get rid of it? I don't know - Why do you have a garage sale? Better to make a little money than pay someone to remove it for you.

shadowfax
Jun 9, 2003, 10:29 AM
i can see it now: the resurrection of the classic CRT iMac..........with an IBM 970, 1.4 GHz. *crunch* revolutionizing the consumer computer market all over again. in classic apple style too. lol ;)

job
Jun 9, 2003, 10:35 AM
Originally posted by Shadowfax
i can see it now: the resurrection of the classic CRT iMac..........with an IBM 970, 1.4 GHz. *crunch* revolutionizing the consumer computer market all over again. in classic apple style too. lol ;)

"The CRT is de..a...d...errrrrr.....maybe not." :D

That would be funny. Imagine the iMac line getting the 970, the pro line staying with G4s (now 1.6Ghz! :p) and Apple keeping the non-upgradable design of the CRT iMac. And then watch them release a newer, faster iMac every two weeks, much to the chargrin of the people who just bought them. :p ;) :D

Silencio
Jun 9, 2003, 11:19 AM
Originally posted by Macrumors
And unconfirmed/anonymous submission claims that the Powerbook line will see speed bumps on June 24th @ 9am at North Beach (@ WWDC).

I was going to say: they're taking over North Beach to announce new Powerbooks? Apple could have a "guerrilla" announcement by using the entire neighborhood: Apple employees whip out new Powerbooks at neighborhood cafes (Trieste, Greco, and Roma - which has great coffee and free Airport!) and early-opening bars (Vesuvio, Tony Nik's); Apple loans a few Powerbooks to City Lights Bookstore, or plants a few Powerbooks in 101 Music to demonstrate the iTunes Music Store. Heck, they could kick those clunky PC Internet terminals off the counter at Ben & Jerry's.

And then I realized all the developer tracks at WWDC were named after San Francisco neighborhoods. Silly me. :)

MacBandit
Jun 9, 2003, 11:54 AM
Originally posted by JBracy
Well the document I read (http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/A2CE393ABF2CE99787256D21006AE8A2/$file/PPC970_MPF_Review.pdf) lists the G4+ as 21.3 watts @ 1.0gHZ, and actually this document is not an IBM document but an independant review posted on IBM's website. Last time I checked 19 watts was cooler than 21.3.

Jason

Well the G4 is a Motorola product and not an IBM one and right out of the Motorola documentation the G4 achieves a maximum of 21 watts. It achieves an average of 15watts. The 19 watts that you are posting for the 970 is also the nominal average watts so it is 4 watts hotter.

Dr.DODO
Jun 9, 2003, 12:31 PM
Another rough translation of a post on Kodawarisan.com

June 6, 2003

12-inch PowerBook G4 to 1Ghz
Apple is planning to introduce 12-inch PowerBook G4 clocked up to 1Ghz. According to information, minor changes will be made on 12- and 17-inch models at same time when new 15-inch PowerBook G4 will be introduced thus entire PowerBook line up will be renewed.

Let’s see if this “rumor” will come true this time.

andyduncan
Jun 9, 2003, 02:42 PM
Originally posted by Silencio
Apple employees whip out new Powerbooks at neighborhood cafes (Trieste, Greco, and Roma - which has great coffee and free Airport!) and early-opening bars (Vesuvio, Tony Nik's)

Yeah, and if they were really taking over northbeach you can bet that there would be at least one event at centerfolds... probably on student sunday... "How to put yourself through community college."

novicegeek
Jun 10, 2003, 12:24 AM
The big thing I can't figure out is that if they're going to update the powerbooks to the 970 processor, why haven't the 17" gone down in price? Surely they're not going to release it in the 15" but not in the 17. And I do think that in the "year of the laptop" there's little chance of them updating the desktops to 970s and keeping the powerbooks with a slower processor. But perhaps they will.

JBracy
Jun 10, 2003, 08:01 AM
Originally posted by novicegeek
The big thing I can't figure out is that if they're going to update the powerbooks to the 970 processor, why haven't the 17" gone down in price? Surely they're not going to release it in the 15" but not in the 17. And I do think that in the "year of the laptop" there's little chance of them updating the desktops to 970s and keeping the powerbooks with a slower processor. But perhaps they will.

The 17" hasn't gone down in price because it is already in short supply and selling fine.

Classic supply and demand:

1) When Demand outstrips Supply price will either stay the same or increase to reach an equilibrium.
2) When Supply outstrips Demand prices drop - sometimes below cost to recoup at least some of the money already spent on production

Economics 101 :rolleyes:

dongmin
Jun 10, 2003, 11:49 AM
Originally posted by JBracy
Well the document I read (http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/A2CE393ABF2CE99787256D21006AE8A2/$file/PPC970_MPF_Review.pdf) lists the G4+ as 21.3 watts @ 1.0gHZ, and actually this document is not an IBM document but an independant review posted on IBM's website. Last time I checked 19 watts was cooler than 21.3.

Jason

obviously the document you read is IBM's marketing mumbo jumbo. The G4+ it lists is the first version of the 7455. There have been multiple revisions of the 7455, the latest (rev 3.3) running at 15 W (typical) @ 1.0 ghz. I know we're in the 'rumors business' but try to be a bit more precise.

JBracy
Jun 10, 2003, 11:57 AM
Originally posted by dongmin
obviously the document you read is IBM's marketing mumbo jumbo. The G4+ it lists is the first version of the 7455. There have been multiple revisions of the 7455, the latest (rev 3.3) running at 15 W (typical) @ 1.0 ghz. I know we're in the 'rumors business' but try to be a bit more precise.

How much more precise can I be than providing a link to my source of information?

Don't get over excited I was just quoting my information. I think at this point nobody has hard numbers on the actual production 970. Also not one has provided the spec for the ACTUAL power usage of the G4's used in current PB's.

Currently it's all alot of fun and speculation. At the end of the day no one is going to prove anyone else right or wrong until WWDC. We all have our opinion and it's just a bit of fun arguing them.

MacBandit
Jun 10, 2003, 12:26 PM
Originally posted by JBracy
How much more precise can I be than providing a link to my source of information?

Don't get over excited I was just quoting my information. I think at this point nobody has hard numbers on the actual production 970. Also not one has provided the spec for the ACTUAL power usage of the G4's used in current PB's.

Currently it's all alot of fun and speculation. At the end of the day no one is going to prove anyone else right or wrong until WWDC. We all have our opinion and it's just a bit of fun arguing them.

Here's the PDF spec sheet as provided by Motorola for the rev. 2 7455 that is used in the current Powerbooks. The power comsumption specs are on page 15.

http://e-www.motorola.com/brdata/PDFDB/docs/MPC7455EC.pdf

JBracy
Jun 11, 2003, 10:12 AM
Originally posted by dongmin
obviously the document you read is IBM's marketing mumbo jumbo.

Funny isn't how for some people Motorola's documentation is gospel, but an independent comparison of IBM and Motorola (http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/A2CE393ABF2CE99787256D21006AE8A2/$file/PPC970_MPF_Review.pdf) by www.MPRonline.com is considered to be "IBM's marketing mumbo jumbo" just because it reports favorably about IBM's chip and is posted on IBM's web site!:confused:

Sun Baked
Jun 11, 2003, 10:27 AM
Originally posted by MacBandit
Here's the PDF spec sheet as provided by Motorola for the rev. 2 7455 that is used in the current Powerbooks. The power comsumption specs are on page 15.

http://e-www.motorola.com/brdata/PDFDB/docs/MPC7455EC.pdf Try again, the people who ripped apart the 12-inch PowerBook found a XC7445A RX867WF which is the Rev 3.3 of the 7445/55...

Rev 2.1s end in C. :p

Yes it was just announced in volume shipments this month, but Apple had it early. ;)

The big bad PowerMac also had a Rev F/3.3 chip 7455.

When you look at the Rev. 3.3 on Motorola's site you'll see it in a couple different voltages.

MacBandit
Jun 11, 2003, 01:46 PM
Originally posted by JBracy
Funny isn't how for some people Motorola's documentation is gospel, but an independent comparison of IBM and Motorola (http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/A2CE393ABF2CE99787256D21006AE8A2/$file/PPC970_MPF_Review.pdf) by www.MPRonline.com is considered to be "IBM's marketing mumbo jumbo" just because it reports favorably about IBM's chip and is posted on IBM's web site!:confused:

The problem is there is no such thing as an independant comparison. They have to get there information from somewhere and the place they get it is from the marketing departments.

cubist
Jun 11, 2003, 04:23 PM
Originally posted by Sun Baked
... just announced in volume shipments this month, but Apple had it early. ;)
...

ARGH!! Do you realize the possible implications of that?

(shudder) Apple may be getting 7457s early too...
No 970s in Powerbooks for a long time:eek:

maxigalaxy
Jun 11, 2003, 05:04 PM
When Apple release a new pb on the 23th (g4 or 970) and
for some reason they are not availible in store,do you think
the old one will be sold for a few days still in store or only on line?
Thanks

MacBandit
Jun 11, 2003, 05:14 PM
Originally posted by maxigalaxy
When Apple release a new pb on the 23th (g4 or 970) and
for some reason they are not availible in store,do you think
the old one will be sold for a few days still in store or only on line?
Thanks

As with any product of Apples or any body elses there will be a large stock still in the hands of the authorized resellers. As for Apple the only way to get old stock is to buy the refurbished product otherwise for most products it is immediately discontinued and only sold through resellers.

maxigalaxy
Jun 11, 2003, 07:36 PM
Originally posted by MacBandit
As with any product of Apples or any body elses there will be a large stock still in the hands of the authorized resellers. As for Apple the only way to get old stock is to buy the refurbished product otherwise for most products it is immediately discontinued and only sold through resellers.


Thank you MacBandit
The point is that I'm leaving back to Europe on the 27th and I want to wait til the very last day to see if there is something new.
My concern is that if there is something new it won't be availible straight away and I won't have time to order it on line.
I'm waiting for the new 12" or the new 15".
What should I do?

:confused:
In Europe it's much more expensive

NicoMan
Jun 12, 2003, 04:11 AM
Originally posted by maxigalaxy
Thank you MacBandit
The point is that I'm leaving back to Europe on the 27th and I want to wait til the very last day to see if there is something new.
My concern is that if there is something new it won't be availible straight away and I won't have time to order it on line.
I'm waiting for the new 12" or the new 15".
What should I do?

:confused:
In Europe it's much more expensive
I doubt the new products will be available immediately after announcement (as in, you can leave the store with them). In any case, just wait until after the Keynote because old products should be cheaper (read: bargains) at your local reseller, and available.

NicoMan

MacBandit
Jun 13, 2003, 10:44 PM
Originally posted by maxigalaxy
Thank you MacBandit
The point is that I'm leaving back to Europe on the 27th and I want to wait til the very last day to see if there is something new.
My concern is that if there is something new it won't be availible straight away and I won't have time to order it on line.
I'm waiting for the new 12" or the new 15".
What should I do?

:confused:
In Europe it's much more expensive

Do you have family or friends in the states? Send them the money and have them purchase it and ship it to you.

ColoJohnBoy
Jun 14, 2003, 06:19 PM
Assuming this is accurate, couldn't it simply be a more in-depth overview of the new PowerBooks, PPC 970 or not? It would make sense to do something like this if it has some new, groundbreaking features, rather than just having Steve good ol' once over at the keynote.
Just a thought.


Visit Blue Pudding!
http://bluepudding.1hwy.com

DHagan4755
Jun 23, 2003, 09:14 PM
anyone still believe this one?

filmusa
Jun 24, 2003, 05:54 PM
so is the 17 inch laptop still going to be better than the new 15 inch upgrade one they are supposdly coming out with?

i need to buy a laptop soon.

thanks

MacBandit
Jun 24, 2003, 05:57 PM
http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/06/24/future/

I think that says it all. Now G5 for the Powerbook for a while. I expect the G4s to really ramp up now. I think they have the 7457s ready and waiting and we'll be seeing 1.25s and greater in the laptops in no time. Also there really is no reason except battery life not to put a dual in the 17".

JBracy
Jun 25, 2003, 09:28 AM
Originally posted by MacBandit
http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/06/24/future/

I think that says it all. Now G5 for the Powerbook for a while. I expect the G4s to really ramp up now. I think they have the 7457s ready and waiting and we'll be seeing 1.25s and greater in the laptops in no time. Also there really is no reason except battery life not to put a dual in the 17".

Also remember at the keynote SJ said that Pixlet requires a G4/1gHz, so I expect the 12" to move to 1gHz and the 15 and 17 to go to 1.25gHz. I also expect the 1gHz will be the minimum processor speed on all new/upgraded Macs