PDA

View Full Version : PowerBook G5 - 'Some Time'


Pages : [1] 2

MacRumors
Apr 19, 2004, 10:24 PM
BBC reports (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3639825.stm) on the PowerBook/iBook updates today.

In the article, Greg Joswiak refused to speculate about the target for a PowerBook G5 introduction, but did state that "it will be some time before that processor [G5] will be in a notebook". He also points to the long lead time that it took for the G4 to make it into portables when it was first introduced.

Ja Di ksw
Apr 19, 2004, 10:27 PM
not to upset people who want one, but considering I bought my first G4 pb a few hours ago, this makes me happy :D. Good to know they will continue to make software that works with it for "some time"

nuclearwinter
Apr 19, 2004, 10:28 PM
I just bought a PB G4 1.25 last September. Two years of use will be just fine before I buy a new Powerbook!

Freg3000
Apr 19, 2004, 10:28 PM
Oh the pain! The horror!

Joswiak made similar comments before, with the same "not anytime soon" line. I'll look for it.

Def. not good news...

Edit: Here is the MacCentral Article (http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/06/24/future/index.php?redirect=1082406684000).


"Motorola is huge for us," said Joswiak. "Our partnership with Motorola is not going away, G4s are in every other part of our product line. As you can see, [the G5] is not going in a PowerBook anytime soon. Motorola remains very important to us, but IBM is the one that can take us to the next level."

That was from June 2003 btw. Not much has changed in almost a year. :(

neonart
Apr 19, 2004, 10:35 PM
If Moto can come up with a decent FSB for the G4, it would be a great processor for Powerbooks for sometime.

If we could just get true DDR333 or 266 it would be outstanding! The G4 is not so bad - it's simply a matter of bandwidth that causes the problems.

IndyGopher
Apr 19, 2004, 10:36 PM
Oh the pain! The horror!

Joswiak made similar comments before, with the same "not anytime soon" line. I'll look for it.

Def. not good news...
He makes mention of the lead time the G4 had, which was 18 months. This puts the time frame around MWSF in 2005... which seems right. However, one has to admit that even if they were going to bring them out next week, they couldn't very well say "Oh you'd be nuts to buy one of these now.. the G5 ones will be out any day now!"

~Shard~
Apr 19, 2004, 10:37 PM
It was an awful long time before the G4 made it's way into the portables after being introduced, so that's fair enough, but the other thing to consider is that that was when Apple was stuck with Motorola and slow progress in general - hopefully things will be slightly accelerated with IBM now. Mind you, that G5 chip is truly a monster - I can only imagine the amount of re-engineering that will have to be done in order to put that thing in a laptop without having it melt instantaneously and fuse into the user's lap. ;)

Plus, there's always the question: Right now, what do you absolutely need a G5 in a portable for that a nice 1.5 GHz G4 can't accomplish? I'm sure there are exceptoins, but really, does anyone truly NEED a G5 in a PowerBook other than simply for bragging rights? If you need a G5, I say get a tower...

Awimoway
Apr 19, 2004, 10:40 PM
Rome wasn't built in a day.

I'm glad Apple is being vocal about the timetable (albeit a bit vague) because drooling fanboys need to have this stamped on their pasty little foreheads: The G5 Powerbook is a monumental undertaking. Customers expect every other component, such as battery life, to remain the same or better than the previous generation. So it's not just a matter of slapping a G5 in there and doing some minor retooling.

Expect to see it January '05 at the earliest, and don't be surprised if we don't see it until June '05.

Dippo
Apr 19, 2004, 10:40 PM
...pointed out that it had taken at least two years for the G4 chip to make it from the desktop to the notebook.

Two years?!?!??

If the same thing applied to the G5...then wouldn't that mean that we wouldn't see G5 Powerbooks until Summer 2005...

That's a long time, and would mean at least one more and maybe two more G4 powerbook updates. The Powerbook G4 might be up to 2.0Ghz before the G5 is released!!

SiliconAddict
Apr 19, 2004, 10:42 PM
meh, I can wait

You can wait. The rest of the industry and many consumers who are interested in performance however will not. Current Pentium M laptops already kick the G4’s ***. Screw OS X. If Apple is going to neglect the hardware what’s the point?

brandon6684
Apr 19, 2004, 10:45 PM
If IBM can get two PowerPC 970s in a blade server, why can't Apple get one in a laptop!

(And those are really 1.6 GHz PowerPC 970s, and not POWER 4s. See here (http://www-132.ibm.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CategoryDisplay?categoryId=2586156&storeId=1&catalogId=-840&langId=-1))

Marlon_JBT
Apr 19, 2004, 10:46 PM
If Moto can come up with a decent FSB for the G4, it would be a great processor for Powerbooks for sometime.

If we could just get true DDR333 or 266 it would be outstanding! The G4 is not so bad - it's simply a matter of bandwidth that causes the problems.

Is there a reason why Apple or Moto can't (or refuse) to increase the bus speed? I have to agree, the FSB is the G4's problem.

But I don't really mind. I've got a friend who believes my 867MHz G4 is comparable to a 2.4GHz P4. :) I'm not saying anything...

SiliconAddict
Apr 19, 2004, 10:48 PM
Two years?!?!??

If the same thing applied to the G5...then wouldn't that mean that we wouldn't see G5 Powerbooks until Summer 2005...


If that's the case screw apple. I'm not waiting over a year for a high performance Apple laptop. And don't tell me the current 1.5Ghz laptop is high performance. Apple users are falling into the Mhz myth. Reality time. PC laptops outperform Apple's *books. I'll get an IBM. :mad: Here's a realization Apple better get in a freaking hurry. If they are going to charge a premium for their laptops they DAMN well better have performance to go with it and if not they better change their price scheme accordingly.
This is NOT cool.

SiliconAddict
Apr 19, 2004, 10:50 PM
Is there a reason why Apple or Moto can't (or refuse) to increase the bus speed? I have to agree, the FSB is the G4's problem.

But I don't really mind. I've got a friend who believes the G4 is comparable to a 2.4GHz P4. :) I'm not saying anything...


I believe its a limitation of the CPU. Thanks Moto. :rolleyes:

Dippo
Apr 19, 2004, 10:53 PM
Plus, there's always the question: Right now, what do you absolutely need a G5 in a portable for that a nice 1.5 GHz G4 can't accomplish? I'm sure there are exceptoins, but really, does anyone truly NEED a G5 in a PowerBook other than simply for bragging rights? If you need a G5, I say get a tower...

If you take a comparable Pc laptop processor say the Pentium Mobile, they max out at 1.7Ghz. So the 1.5Ghz G4 certianly isn't slow. Not as fast a Dual 2.0Ghz G5, but not slow either.

Also, the Radeon 9700 graphics is really top notch. You certianly can't complain about the video card! Dell doesn't have anything above a Radeon 9600 for their notebooks.

Dippo
Apr 19, 2004, 10:56 PM
Is there a reason why Apple or Moto can't (or refuse) to increase the bus speed? I have to agree, the FSB is the G4's problem.

Increase in bus speed creates A LOT more heat than just increasing the divider inside the chip.

Sure they could increase the bus speed to 400Mhz but there would be an excessive amount of heat that would have to be removed.

Even in the PC world, laptops are usually clocked at lower FSB speeds than their desktop counterparts. I know that the Athlon Mobiles are clock at 266Mhz FSB.

bar italia
Apr 19, 2004, 10:58 PM
I'm glad Apple is being vocal about the timetable (albeit a bit vague)
"some time" is a timetable? Who's the "fanboy" here?


[b]The G5 Powerbook is a monumental undertaking. :rolleyes:

Bhennies
Apr 19, 2004, 11:03 PM
Right now, what do you absolutely need a G5 in a portable for that a nice 1.5 GHz G4 can't accomplish? I'm sure there are exceptoins, but really, does anyone truly NEED a G5 in a PowerBook other than simply for bragging rights? If you need a G5, I say get a tower...I would like a desktop replacement that can adequately run Pro Tools. The powerbooks don't even come close, even with the updates. I would love it if I could reduce my audio hardware to just a g5 powerbook with a firewire interface and a small rack of outboard gear. Ahhhh...just dreaming.

iGuy
Apr 19, 2004, 11:06 PM
I don't really think there is much that can be said about performance until these units ship and some benchmark tests have been run.

At that time I would be interested in seeing how a 'decked-out' 17" compares to the latest Pentium-M. Real numbers, not just what things 'feel like.'

We were told to expect speed bumps and that's what we got. However I'm more concerned about the display than the processor.

Apple hasn't updated their LCD panels in some time. With the recent 'refresh' of the PBs, it would seem there won't be a major upgrade to the PBs for some time.

Would Apple release a new LCD panel in a Display and not update the LCD panel in the PBs at the same time? In other words, do we have to wait until the next major upgrade to the PBs before we see new Displays?

I hope not. I think Apple could release a new Display seperately but wouldn't that make the PBs look less attractive?

Just thinking out loud - please don't shoot me.

~iGuy

kwimalar
Apr 19, 2004, 11:10 PM
I've got a 1.0Ghz Titanium Powerbook and have no problems with
the CPU performance whatsoever - compiling, video rendering, etc..

It's a beautiful machine.

The only speed issue I've encountered is DVD burning
(I've got a 1x drive), but since the current lineup
have 4x drives, even this limitation vanishes.

If you absolutely needed G5 performance, you'd get a desktop.

In fact, I'm much keener on hearing news about a dual 3Ghz G5
desktop than a G5 laptop.

AndrewMT
Apr 19, 2004, 11:15 PM
"it will be some time before that processor [G5] will be in a notebook".

It will be some time before I buy a notebook from Apple.

PlaceofDis
Apr 19, 2004, 11:18 PM
we just need to be realisitic, i mean yeah apple needs to get the G5 into a laptop as soon as possible, but really look at what problems this presents... the heat issue is not that easy to get around. my 12 inch G4 PB gets hot enough as it is. Unless IBM gets cooler chips or apple finds some new way to cool the laptops this is going to take a while...

Sped
Apr 19, 2004, 11:19 PM
I am going out of the country soon so I needed this update. I had to get a laptop. Yesterday I would have spent around $2500 for a 1.25Ghz PB, but today I can spend the same on 250 more Mhz and 64MB more video ram - I am happy about that. Although a G5 would be outstanding, the reality is the G5 is just beginning to be used in Apple computers. G5s WILL trickle down to the remaining products but it won't be as fast as most of us would like. Meanwhile, you can sit and bitch or you can hunt for more info on when it will happen - your choice.

Some_Big_Spoon
Apr 19, 2004, 11:25 PM
You mean the Power 4 & 5, but I getcha'... You have to think about the power draw though. Those Blades don't run on batteries, they're plugged in, just like the G5 Tower.

If we had come to expect 30 minutes of battery life, like the PC "desktop replacements" then I'm sure we'd have a G5 PB now that was 3" thick and needed to be plugged in all the time, but we all expect 5 hours (or 2.5-3 in reality), so we have to wait.

I don't like it, I think Apple's charging too much, etc., but there's real engineering going on at Apple, so as long as the chips keep flowing, then we just need to sit tight..

I hate it too..

If IBM can get two PowerPC 970s in a blade server, why can't Apple get one in a laptop!

hulugu
Apr 19, 2004, 11:26 PM
If IBM can get two PowerPC 970s in a blade server, why can't Apple get one in a laptop!

Uh, how thick and heavy is a blade server? And, um how much power does such a thing use? I know their efficient, but enough to fit into a laptop?
Just a thought.
Also, I have to agree with the people who pointed out that the G4 FSB could be better, and I can't believe that Motorola hasn't been able to get closer to 2.0GHz.
Thirdly, what's the deal with IBM's G3? Was there ever a chance that it's development could have surpased the G4?

hacksaw
Apr 19, 2004, 11:26 PM
Is there a reason why Apple or Moto can't (or refuse) to increase the bus speed? I have to agree, the FSB is the G4's problem.

But I don't really mind. I've got a friend who believes my 867MHz G4 is comparable to a 2.4GHz P4. :) I'm not saying anything...

Maybe you choose your friiends more carefully. Hummmm...

http://www.barefeats.com/al15b.html

pigwin32
Apr 19, 2004, 11:27 PM
Rome wasn't built in a day.

I'm glad Apple is being vocal about the timetable (albeit a bit vague) because drooling fanboys need to have this stamped on their pasty little foreheads: The G5 Powerbook is a monumental undertaking. Customers expect every other component, such as battery life, to remain the same or better than the previous generation. So it's not just a matter of slapping a G5 in there and doing some minor retooling.

Expect to see it January '05 at the earliest, and don't be surprised if we don't see it until June '05.
Hmmm, don't know any drooling fanboys, oh wait, are you talking about me?

I don't buy your June '05 timeframe. First of all the VP of hardware product marketing is hardly going to say there are G5's just around the corner on the day the G4 line is refreshed. The rest of his comments are just obfuscation.

I agree that G5's aren't just around the corner but it's pure speculation as to when they will be available. This latest refresh has given Apple some breathing space and I guess you can give props to Mot for that. But I sincerely doubt there will be another speed bump in the G4 PB. Apple has to release the G5's at speeds higher than the then current G4's. This means every speed increment in the G4 PB makes it more difficult to release the G5 PB, the increased speed also increases the heat that needs to be dissipated. Apple's only recourse is to get the G5 into the PB asap and then work on the speed/heat issue in situ.

Apple has had G5's to play with now for a considerable amount of time and I think based on this latest refresh, all PB engineering resources have also for some time been engaged in developing the new machine; the refresh was pretty much a pin-compatible component swap requiring minimal engineering input.

My prediction is Jan '05 at the *latest* and otherwise before the end of this year. Of course I've been awfully wrong before.

TyleRomeo
Apr 19, 2004, 11:33 PM
ok so if there isn't a G5 powerbook at the next revision, what is apple going to do? The g4 is at 1.5GHZ. Can it go up to 1.8GHZ in 8 months? I don't think so. We had a 1.42GHZ 12 months ago. They moved up 80MHZ in 12 months. So unless people don't mind a 1.56GHZ powerbook next. I only see the g5 option or a slower dual G4 option. Maybe dual 1GHZ or dual 1.25GHZ for the 15 and 17 powerbooks. and bump the 12' to a single 1.5GHZ and max out the ibooks at 1.33GHZ and 1.25 for the 12 inch with a 167MHZ bus. What do you guys think?

Tyler

Koodauw
Apr 19, 2004, 11:37 PM
Come on guys and gals "Some time" is code for "Wait untill next Tuesday" ;)

I do agree with the above posters though. The G5 is a great chip, but it runs hot. You have to take the good with the bad. The bad in this case is your not going to get a PB G5 for a while. It's not like Apple can just snap it's finger at get it in there. I am sure they want it in a PB just as much as we do.

Although the thought of the current PB's (or ones very similar) for at least the next year, is downright scary. I think Apple is in a bit of a bind here.

What if.....

The iBook series uses an IBM processor while the PB uses a Moto one right? Anyone give me a breif over veiw of the differences? Any chances these things could reved up more than the Moto ones and find away into the PB's?

gskiser
Apr 19, 2004, 11:41 PM
First, I wouldn't put much stock in the "two year" comparison to the G4. Its this guys job to do the PR spin. As another poster pointed out, if PBG5's were being released tomorrow, this guy would still plug the G4 until morning. What He's a marketing executive doing an interview on the day they released refreshed PBG4's. What's he going to say, 'Yeah, the G4 is on it's last leg and this update is really just to keep sales going until the PBG5 is released in a few months. But please, dont let that discourage you from plunking down a couple grand on these beautiful "new" G4PBs. He's got to allude to a time far off (2 years), otherwise, there's no justification for buying one of these updated models. They said the same thing about the G3 in ibooks last year. When questioned about the possibility of a G4 iBook they replied with something to the effect that 'we believe the G3 has a lot of life left in it.' Yeah right, like any of us believed that. Though I knew that statement was garbage, they actually put the G4 in the iBook sooner that I expected. I wasn't expecting a G4 in the iBook until the PBG5 it.

Secondly, I've heard many people say that we don't truly 'need' the power of a PBG5 and that the G4 can handle everyday tasks. This is true, we don't 'need' that much power yet. In addition, those same people throw out accusations that we're just vain in wanting the "latest and newest technology". While this may be true for some, it is not for all. People making those claims are forgetting the users like me who upgrade once only 5-6 years. I'm currently on an iBook 366mghz G3 and am ready to upgrade. I've filled my hard drive with Photos and Music and have finally maxed out this computer. While I don't need the power of a G5 today, and could get by with a G4, I'm looking ahead long term. I cannot afford to upgrade every 2 years like some, and I want a powerbook that is going to last me 5+ years. I don't see this future for the G4. The G5 and 64bit is the direction Apple is moving. While the OS X may not support 64bit for another year (or maybe even more), that is the direction we're going, and I want a computer that can support that growth. Its not the raw processing power of the G5 I want, but rather it's potential to take advantate of the direction Apple is headed. My G3 has served me well, but is on its last leg. I got 6 years out of it. I just don't see the PBG4s as having this type of longevity at this point. I could care less about the 'power' of the G5, I just want it because it's not going to be an obsolete processor in a year. The G4 is going the direction of the G3.

Finally, the PBG5 could come in June or it could come in Jan. Who knows. Either way, it's going to make it to the PB faster than the G4 did. The 2yr analogy doesn't hold water. That was several years ago, a different time. Technology has changed. Portables were not as commonplace, and we're seeing a trend of people wanting the portability over the desktop. This is going to speed things up. Plus, back when then, they didn't have the Xserve. We know that they can get a G5 in a small thin enclosure and control the heat. Not to say that PBG5's are around the corner simply because of the Xserve, but it's not going to be any two years. I agree with others who said 'if you need a PB now, buy it now', 'if you can wait, wait'. I desperately want one, but cannot force myself to pay for a processor thats on its way out the door. Waiting only a few months to purchase a PB could result in a few years of extra use. A PBG4, I may get a good 2 years. A PBG5, I definitely get 5-6 years out of it. Given what I've said, I don't think the PBG5 is as far off as the marketing clown leads us to believe. I understand that if you wait for the newest technology, you'll always be waiting. However, in the case of where we know the G4 is on its way out, a few months patience now could result in years of extra use.

Steven1621
Apr 19, 2004, 11:43 PM
honestly, one can't really be suprised that it might take awhile...

mxpiazza
Apr 19, 2004, 11:48 PM
there isn't going to be another revision... powerbook updates are roughly every 8 months, and that will take us right into MWSF '05 in january, upon which the g5 books will be announced.

just one man's educated guess, i'm not going to run around pretending that i know someone inside apple or crap like that.

h'biki
Apr 19, 2004, 11:50 PM
Plus, there's always the question: Right now, what do you absolutely need a G5 in a portable for that a nice 1.5 GHz G4 can't accomplish? I'm sure there are exceptoins, but really, does anyone truly NEED a G5 in a PowerBook other than simply for bragging rights? If you need a G5, I say get a tower...

I concur. I'm a professional editor who has both a desktop and a laptop. To me, I would gain more benefit from a dual G4 17" Powerbook than a single G5 Powerbook. Nonetheless, I'm upgrading my 1ghz TiBook to a 1.5ghz Albook. 50% speed increase is worth it.

It seems to me that the people who do all the whining are the very people who don't actually -need- the machines. Its about dick measuring. Single Processor G4s, clock for clock, aren't that much slower than a single processor G5 -- at least on the stats I've seen.

pigwin32
Apr 20, 2004, 12:00 AM
PowerPage (http://www.powerpage.org/cgi-bin/WebObjects/powerpage.woa/wa/story?newsID=11989) have a photo of the new PB G5. Hopefully Apple will slim it down before the June release.

Borg3of5
Apr 20, 2004, 12:08 AM
I've been using my 800 MHz G3 iBook for about 1.5 years now, and I've honestly got to say, that for what I use it. It does just fine. It's no desktop replacement though.

I'm really hoping that the G5's get updated sometime in the next few months; because, this is the way I'm going. Going from a G3 to a G5, and skipping the G4 altogether, equates to going from the Dark Ages to the Present day. The jump from 32-bit tech to 64-bit tech is humongous. The Dual 2.0 GHz G5 is only about 9% faster than the Dual 1.8 GHz. My only worry is when the OS is fully converted to 64-bit in a couple of years. Will that difference make the G5 slow as molassas then?

No more laptops for me; compared to the current lineup of dual processor G5's, laptops are great vacation toys, but underpowered for a desktop replacement.

This iBook is cute and everything, I just want to feel the raw power of a dual processor G5

hacksaw
Apr 20, 2004, 12:11 AM
I concur. I'm a professional editor who has both a desktop and a laptop. To me, I would gain more benefit from a dual G4 17" Powerbook than a single G5 Powerbook. Nonetheless, I'm upgrading my 1ghz TiBook to a 1.5ghz Albook. 50% speed increase is worth it.

It seems to me that the people who do all the whining are the very people who don't actually -need- the machines. Its about dick measuring. Single Processor G4s, clock for clock, aren't that much slower than a single processor G5 -- at least on the stats I've seen.


This might indicate how these processors will scale.

http://www.barefeats.com/pvp.html

http://www.barefeats.com/fcp4.html

Kelson
Apr 20, 2004, 12:15 AM
If you are on a iBook 366mhz G3, you could very easily grab a low end iBook for $1k, which would be a major upgrade. The iBook is going to remain G4 based for a long time. Why would you do this?

You would get a major upgrade now, at very low cost. You could then use this computer until the G5 Powerbook, Rev.B is released. After all, Apple does have a bad track record on Rev.A. When the PBG5 Rev.B comes out, you sell the iBook G4 on eBay, recouping at least 50% of your investment.

This means that for 500$ or less, you get a G4 1ghz system to use for the next 1.5 yrs, as Rev.B of the PBG5 is unlikely to ship before Q3CY05. Then you get your PBG5 to last a few years.

I'm running on a 1ghz TiBook, which I had entertained ideas of refreshing in Q4CY04, but with each OS upgrade improving performance, I just don't see the need. I figure it will easily last me until MWSF '06.

Also, the G4 is not going to be obsolete anytime soon. Apple will be supporting it for the next 3-5 yrs. The core PPC instruction set is the same on the G4 and G5, which is why apps run on both. Just like old Pentium II computers can run Windows XP, albeit slowly.

Oh, and there is more to cooling a laptop than a blade server, or 1RU server. You don't have the same power constraints of a battery, noise constraints for the fans, weight constraints for the portability, and 1RU is alot thicker than 1", which is what a PB is. One of the major constraints is also the DDR controller, which needs to move on-die before the G5 is viable in a laptop.

In closing, the G4 still has significant legs, look at how long it took for Apple to move the iBook to the G4. Assuming the PBG5 hits MWSF '05, you probably won't see G5 iBooks until MWSF '07 if not WWDC '07. If you get 6 yrs from a computer, you are very lucky, it is best to plan for 3-4.

- Kelson


Secondly, I've heard many people say that we don't truly 'need' the power of a PBG5 and that the G4 can handle everyday tasks. This is true, we don't 'need' that much power yet. In addition, those same people throw out accusations that we're just vain in wanting the "latest and newest technology". While this may be true for some, it is not for all. People making those claims are forgetting the users like me who upgrade once only 5-6 years. I'm currently on an iBook 366mghz G3 and am ready to upgrade. I've filled my hard drive with Photos and Music and have finally maxed out this computer. While I don't need the power of a G5 today, and could get by with a G4, I'm looking ahead long term. I cannot afford to upgrade every 2 years like some, and I want a powerbook that is going to last me 5+ years. I don't see this future for the G4. The G5 and 64bit is the direction Apple is moving. While the OS X may not support 64bit for another year (or maybe even more), that is the direction we're going, and I want a computer that can support that growth. Its not the raw processing power of the G5 I want, but rather it's potential to take advantate of the direction Apple is headed. My G3 has served me well, but is on its last leg. I got 6 years out of it. I just don't see the PBG4s as having this type of longevity at this point. I could care less about the 'power' of the G5, I just want it because it's not going to be an obsolete processor in a year. The G4 is going the direction of the G3.

Finally, the PBG5 could come in June or it could come in Jan. Who knows. Either way, it's going to make it to the PB faster than the G4 did. The 2yr analogy doesn't hold water. That was several years ago, a different time. Technology has changed. Portables were not as commonplace, and we're seeing a trend of people wanting the portability over the desktop. This is going to speed things up. Plus, back when then, they didn't have the Xserve. We know that they can get a G5 in a small thin enclosure and control the heat. Not to say that PBG5's are around the corner simply because of the Xserve, but it's not going to be any two years. I agree with others who said 'if you need a PB now, buy it now', 'if you can wait, wait'. I desperately want one, but cannot force myself to pay for a processor thats on its way out the door. Waiting only a few months to purchase a PB could result in a few years of extra use. A PBG4, I may get a good 2 years. A PBG5, I definitely get 5-6 years out of it. Given what I've said, I don't think the PBG5 is as far off as the marketing clown leads us to believe. I understand that if you wait for the newest technology, you'll always be waiting. However, in the case of where we know the G4 is on its way out, a few months patience now could result in years of extra use.

Squire
Apr 20, 2004, 12:18 AM
Plus, there's always the question: Right now, what do you absolutely need a G5 in a portable for that a nice 1.5 GHz G4 can't accomplish? I'm sure there are exceptoins, but really, does anyone truly NEED a G5 in a PowerBook other than simply for bragging rights? If you need a G5, I say get a tower...

I'm kind of torn here. I need a notebook- no, I'm going to need a notebook- fairly soon. Here are my options:

(A) 1 GHz iBook: The bottom-of-the-line iBook will do nicely for the time being then later, grab a rev. B PB G5 when/if they come out.

(B) combo-drive 12" PowerBook: If instant gratification is what I want, this little puppy might do the trick without breaking the bank.

(C) combo drive 15" PowerBook with BTO backlit keyboard option: Instant gratification but hard on the bank account.

So, my question is this: how much faster would, say a 1.6 GHz G5 be than a 1.5 GHz G4? In other words, if the G5 made it into a notebook, would that necessarily make the notebook a far superior machine?

Squire

aavatsma
Apr 20, 2004, 12:21 AM
Plus, there's always the question: Right now, what do you absolutely need a G5 in a portable for that a nice 1.5 GHz G4 can't accomplish? I'm sure there are exceptoins, but really, does anyone truly NEED a G5 in a PowerBook other than simply for bragging rights? If you need a G5, I say get a tower...

Why do people keep saying this? I need a faster computer and a g5 is not going to be fast enough. No computer will ever be fast enough as long as people do renderings and other stuff that takes time. I say a computer is fast enough when I never have to wait for it to finish a task, so dont give me some crap about the g4 being fast enough.
But dont get me wrong, I am not a unsatisfied powerbookuser. I take what I can get from apple (as long as I can afford it), and I am sure they do whatever they can to keep the products as good as possible.

And please dont tell me to go by a tower. I am a student, I want the possibillity to take my computer to school and home on vacations. AND I want the possibilty to work with big illustrator-, photoshop- and cad-files without waiting. I dont want to wait all night to see what a render is going to look like, before I make some changes and start the render all over.

I seriously doubt that I am one of the few who would benefit from a faster cpu. If your point is that the g5 wont be any faster than the current g4, you can of course diregard this post. Just dont tell me people dont need faster computers, it just doesnt make any sense.

oingoboingo
Apr 20, 2004, 12:24 AM
I don't really think there is much that can be said about performance until these units ship and some benchmark tests have been run.

At that time I would be interested in seeing how a 'decked-out' 17" compares to the latest Pentium-M. Real numbers, not just what things 'feel like.'

www.barefeats.com did a small 1.25GHz 15" and 1.33GHz 17" PowerBook vs. Centrino benchmark series a while ago. The results are here:

http://www.barefeats.com/al15b.html

There's not much here...only Unreal Tournament 2003 and Cinebench 2003. Basically both the 1.33GHz 17" PB and the 1.25GHz 15" PB were totally outrun by both a 1.3GHz Centrino and a 1.6GHz Centrino in Cinebench 2003. Check the web page for exact details. Make of those what you will.

oingoboingo
Apr 20, 2004, 12:44 AM
OK, after the massive explosion in replies that happened in the PowerBook release annoucement thread, I think we should have some kind of condensed, FAQ-like digest which will only take a few minutes to read, but which will convey all of the necessary points. Basically this FAQ is a collection of phrases which you can arrange as you will. You can pose them as questions or statements, mostly just by changing around a few key words and punctuation marks. Go ahead...experiment...mix'n'match!!! It's just like wasting hours reading the real forum!!!

- This is a disappointing update. Still no sign of the G5. Motorola sucks. I will not even consider a PowerBook until it has a 5GHz G5. Dude, I'm getting a Dell.

- Nobody needs a G5 PowerBook. Hell, most people don't even need a G4 PowerBook...it's just wasted processing power. I'm running PhotoShop, Illustrator, Final Cut Pro, GarageBand, Logic and Unreal Tournament 2004 all simultaneously on my 266MHz G3 PowerBook and it runs GREAT!!!. I deeply resent any suggestion that anyone needs more processing power than me. I am the benchmark.

- I can buy a 3.4GHz Dell Inspiron for $29.95 and have it personally delivered by Michael Dell. Only a fool would by a PowerBook.

- That Dell weighs 27.9kg and is made out of cardboard. I know, I worked in an office where we had 5000 Dell Inspirons and they all failed. Every single one of them. My 300MHz G3 toilet-seat iBook runs faster than those things anyway. MHz myth!!! MHz myth!!! Only a fool would buy a Dell. Their support staff are all in India, and instead of sending replacement parts they send stale pappadums.

- Nice updates, but I wish they had 1024MB of video RAM as an option. That would make that slow GeForce FX 5200 FLY!!!!

- 4MB of VRAM is way too much. If anything Apple should get rid of the VRAM chips and replace them with a small image of Steve Jobs. The GeForce FX 5200 in my 12" PowerBook runs UT2004 at 500fps. I don't know what you're talking about. Go back to the Wintel world, fanboi.

- <groan> I only ordered a pallet-full of the old 17" PowerBooks yesterday!!!

- You fool. You should have followed the PowerBook rumours. They've all been 100% reliable. We've had new PowerBooks released every Tuesday since January, you idiot!!!

Does anyone else want to add anything else?

Maverick
Apr 20, 2004, 12:44 AM
If that's the case screw apple. I'm not waiting over a year for a high performance Apple laptop. And don't tell me the current 1.5Ghz laptop is high performance. Apple users are falling into the Mhz myth. Reality time. PC laptops outperform Apple's *books. I'll get an IBM. :mad: Here's a realization Apple better get in a freaking hurry. If they are going to charge a premium for their laptops they DAMN well better have performance to go with it and if not they better change their price scheme accordingly.
This is NOT cool.

Something tells me that even if 7 GHz Uberbook G15's came out tomorrow you still wouldn't be satisfied.

Go ahead and switch. It won't hurt my feelings. :rolleyes:

wizard
Apr 20, 2004, 12:48 AM
What you say is very true - that is bandwidth is an issue. That is why I'd love to see Motorola implement a G4 with a seperate memmory interface. Since motorola already does this with a number of processors I have to wonder why Apple hasn't asked for such a chip yet.

I suspect that Apple is relying on incremental increase at the expense of making drastic performance improvements. Really a shame if you ask me.

AS to the G5 I don't see it in a laptop anytime soon. Wish I was wrong but I think we will need to see something more that an FX before we see them in a PowerBook. By more I mean an entire system of chips optimized for portable usage.

Dave


If Moto can come up with a decent FSB for the G4, it would be a great processor for Powerbooks for sometime.

If we could just get true DDR333 or 266 it would be outstanding! The G4 is not so bad - it's simply a matter of bandwidth that causes the problems.

MacMyDay
Apr 20, 2004, 12:49 AM
It's not hard to agree that a G5 needs to come into the PowerBook range soon because of the difference between Wintel laptops and Apple's. Having said such, what people tend to forget is the actual design of the PowerBook. You may wish to compare it and say a Dell 2.4GHz kicks its arse or whatever, but it's really not always the case and what you mainly forget is that the Dell's are about 2" thicker, weight a helluva lot more and look bloody ugly. I told myself I'd wait for a G5 and I would if my screen wasn't so buggered, but I'll get a G4 1.5GHz now and just put up with it for the next few years until I can afford another. It'll be my main computer, yeah, but as many have said, you don't actually need that at all. Were I to truly need the power then I'd get a G5 desktop, perhaps a low-end one so I could upgrade it. My friend has a 2.4GHz Dell and it won't run any games on it at all, because the graphics card just can't handle it, nor could my friends Sony 2.8GHz. The Megahertz Myth may be exaggerated, but even more so on Wintel machines that look good from face value, but lack all the key items that the PowerBooks come shipped with, especially now there's the 128Mb VRAM option.

Just what I think

nsb3000
Apr 20, 2004, 12:53 AM
there isn't going to be another revision... powerbook updates are roughly every 8 months, and that will take us right into MWSF '05 in january, upon which the g5 books will be announced.


You make it sound as if powerbook updates grow on trees...I am sure another eight months after that we are guaranteed to have better faster, GP powerbooks?

deepkid
Apr 20, 2004, 12:53 AM
Plus, there's always the question: Right now, what do you absolutely need a G5 in a portable for that a nice 1.5 GHz G4 can't accomplish? I'm sure there are exceptoins, but really, does anyone truly NEED a G5 in a PowerBook other than simply for bragging rights? If you need a G5, I say get a tower...

Sure, a G5 portable would be excellent for mobile videographers. I'm considering covering the Democratic and Republican conventions. Having a G5 powerbook to quickly put together some video and publish on the web would be great.

Think of the people who do it full-time and need the quickest turn around.. CNN, etc.

Even ad agency types who travel a lot and need to get it turned around quickly would benefit.

There are other similar scenarios whereby a G5 powerbook with true bandwidth and ability to offer more RAM would be welcomed with open arms.

Migs
Apr 20, 2004, 12:55 AM
Well said Oingo boingo, I wonder if that can be put at the front of most of these hardware threads.

oingoboingo
Apr 20, 2004, 12:55 AM
What you say is very true - that is bandwidth is an issue. That is why I'd love to see Motorola implement a G4 with a seperate memmory interface. Since motorola already does this with a number of processors I have to wonder why Apple hasn't asked for such a chip yet.

I suspect that Apple is relying on incremental increase at the expense of making drastic performance improvements. Really a shame if you ask me.

AS to the G5 I don't see it in a laptop anytime soon. Wish I was wrong but I think we will need to see something more that an FX before we see them in a PowerBook. By more I mean an entire system of chips optimized for portable usage.

Dave

I doubt Motorola would really be interested in investing any significant R&D resource into a desktop processor line which is really only used by one customer...and that customer has staked the performance future of their company on moving away from your chip designs!

As many people have pointed out in the past, once the CPU division of Motorola is spun-out, they probably want to concentrate on designing and building new embedded PowerPC designs, rather than sinking a lot of money into upgrading desktop/notebook CPUs destinated for a business relationship which is ultimately a dead-end.

deepkid
Apr 20, 2004, 01:07 AM
If they are going to charge a premium for their laptops they DAMN well better have performance to go with it and if not they better change their price scheme accordingly.
This is NOT cool.

Sales figures will determine whether or not customers believe that Apple is charging a premium for their books.

It's like a broken record on the mac forums, but here goes... It's not just about the components in Apple's hardware.. it's the entire computing experience. The operating system, apps on the mac are arguably more enjoyable to use. Not having to deal with virus attacks and worms gives back to productivity. These are crucial benefits to being a mac user.

For this, I'd gladly pay any perceived premium. But this is an antiquated complaint as feature for feature, Apple isn't more expensive. Considering total cost of ownership and productivity gained by not fighting viruses, worms or dealing with a hobbled together and annoying os like XP, makes buying Apple's hardware well worth it.

wizard
Apr 20, 2004, 01:11 AM
Have you every noticed how the people that complain about dick measuring are the ones not to measure up!

Its a shame that people only see the world form their frame of reference. The I"I never do anthing challenging so why would anyone else" mentality. These are probally the same people that go hiking in the moutains with a rope but never use that rope to climb the mountain.

There are many professions that can and will make use of all the computing resources they have available to them. Just because one can't not imagine this does not mean that it is not the case.

As to a 970 based portable it is very apparent that the 970FX is not ready to go into a portable and may never be ready. Sure this upsets people that would love to have a PowerBook with modern performance capabilities. It does need to be kept in perspective Apple will have faster machines in the future, how those machine come to market is a mystery. We could see dual processors or a special purpose chipset or a truely improved G4. That is the future, in the present many people are justified in their frustration with Apple.

Thanks
dave


I concur. I'm a professional editor who has both a desktop and a laptop. To me, I would gain more benefit from a dual G4 17" Powerbook than a single G5 Powerbook. Nonetheless, I'm upgrading my 1ghz TiBook to a 1.5ghz Albook. 50% speed increase is worth it.

It seems to me that the people who do all the whining are the very people who don't actually -need- the machines. Its about dick measuring. Single Processor G4s, clock for clock, aren't that much slower than a single processor G5 -- at least on the stats I've seen.

wizard
Apr 20, 2004, 01:20 AM
Errr embedded is what I'm talking about. Motorola has already implemented memory interfaces on some of theire ebedded chips. A fast G4 with an on board memory controller couold be very attactive to there embedded cusotesr and Apple alike.

To be honest I don't think the spun off division has a chance in hell of staying in the embedded market it is in now without system CPU's. MUch of the embedded space that the G4 goes into will benefit form better performance. The market is there.

Besides do you really think that Apple wants to put all its eggs in one basket? I suspect that Apple willl continue to use Motorola hardware for as long as itis practical. Obviously that won't be to long if Motorola can't continue to improve its product line.

Dave



I doubt Motorola would really be interested in investing any significant R&D resource into a desktop processor line which is really only used by one customer...and that customer has staked the performance future of their company on moving away from your chip designs!

As many people have pointed out in the past, once the CPU division of Motorola is spun-out, they probably want to concentrate on designing and building new embedded PowerPC designs, rather than sinking a lot of money into upgrading desktop/notebook CPUs destinated for a business relationship which is ultimately a dead-end.

Snowy_River
Apr 20, 2004, 01:21 AM
Two years?!?!??

If the same thing applied to the G5...then wouldn't that mean that we wouldn't see G5 Powerbooks until Summer 2005...

That's a long time, and would mean at least one more and maybe two more G4 powerbook updates. The Powerbook G4 might be up to 2.0Ghz before the G5 is released!!

Two years? Uh, no. The G4 Power Mac was released in Sept. '99. The G4 PowerBook was released in Jan. '01. That's 16 months, not two years. It's not even a year and a half. If the G5 PowerBook is released on the next revision (say sometime between November this year and January next), it'll be on the same type of time table as the G4 was.

Two years? Sheesh. Way to throw out a marketing lie...

JGowan
Apr 20, 2004, 01:30 AM
I have not seen one person talk about another very important thing about bring the G5 PowerBook to light,... the NEW enclosure.

Do you actually think Apple will just stick a G5 into the existing AL Book and be done with it? Not only will the book need new innards internally to make the G5 a reality, but it'll need a slick new enclosure.

I remember when the TI Books first came out... I always wondered HOW IN THE HECK would they improve such a work of art. Finally with the AL Book, they succeeded... in SPADES.

Now, they have to somehow (SOMEHOW!!!) top the AL Book... think about it... just how wonderful is the current enclosure. I'd say it's easily the coolest laptop the world has ever seen. Topping it will not be easy.

But, in order to attract new converts (i.e. the people how have passed on the current AL Books) Apple knows they've got to raise the bar once again. This is going to take time!

We just got these new AL Books about a year ago... I got the first 17" PB and I remember it came sometime in April. Why would Apple throw out all of the R&D it took to develop such an amazing enclosure to just abandon it in a year's time! Those who thought G5 Books were coming out are simply MAD.

Even though I've got the first 17" AL Book (at a mere 1GHz), I wouldn't trade too much for it (mayber a newer book, but that's all)... if you are the proud owner of any of the AL's then you know exactly what I mean.


Be patient. And in the meantime, order one of the new ones, you will be very glad you did. They are marvelous.

Dave the Great
Apr 20, 2004, 01:32 AM
Uh, how thick and heavy is a blade server? ...

It actually is only 1.75". Yeah, granted it is heavy, but it also supports a lot of things a laptop does not need, such as dual processors, 8gb ram support, 3 HardDrive support, more I/O connectivity, etc. etc.

EMachines is already on Rev. B of their Athlon 64 laptops. If eMachines can make it happen, why can't Apple?

Yeah, the eMachines is almost 2 pounds heavier and I think .25" thicker, but it is also like $800 - $1000 less than the comparable PB.

I would be happy with a G5 DeskBook right now. It could be priced around the current PB, but the trade-off would be that it would be a little heavier,little thicker, and a little less run-time.

QCassidy352
Apr 20, 2004, 01:32 AM
I would like a desktop replacement that can adequately run Pro Tools. The powerbooks don't even come close, even with the updates. I would love it if I could reduce my audio hardware to just a g5 powerbook with a firewire interface and a small rack of outboard gear. Ahhhh...just dreaming.

your signature says you're running a dual 500 mhz G4 tower. And yet a 1.5 Ghz powerbook "wouldn't even come close" to meeting your needs? :rolleyes:

Snowy_River
Apr 20, 2004, 01:34 AM
It seems to me that the people who do all the whining are the very people who don't actually -need- the machines. Its about dick measuring. Single Processor G4s, clock for clock, aren't that much slower than a single processor G5 -- at least on the stats I've seen.

While I'm not whining, I do want to see a G5 PB. Once one comes out I plan on getting it. I can't really afford to have two computers at this point, and I need the portability (a bit more important than the power), but having the power would be immensely useful in a variety of things that I do. So, in a sense, I do need the power, but I'm getting by without it for now, as I don't have a choice. (Of course, one could argue that none of us needs our computers at all...)

Snowy_River
Apr 20, 2004, 01:38 AM
...look at how long it took for Apple to move the iBook to the G4. Assuming the PBG5 hits MWSF '05, you probably won't see G5 iBooks until MWSF '07 if not WWDC '07...

The iBook didn't get the G4 because Apple didn't have a new processor yet. If we're back onto a decent processor upgrade cycle, we should see a G6 in another year or two. Around that same time, I wouldn't be surprised to see the iBook move to the G5. So, that would mean G5 iBooks in late '05 or '06, not '07.

Trapped
Apr 20, 2004, 01:38 AM
If IBM can get two PowerPC 970s in a blade server, why can't Apple get one in a laptop!


Uh, how thick and heavy is a blade server? And, um how much power does such a thing use? I know their efficient, but enough to fit into a laptop?
Just a thought.

The BladeCenter JS20 takes 14 hot swappable 'blades', each of which contains 2 x1.6Ghz PPC970's in a space 12" high x 17" wide x 28" deep. Up to 2 IDE HDs per blade.

A fully loaded BladeCenter comes with 4 x 1800w power supplies, although only 2 are required (all hot swappable). That's 128w per cpu. A Powerbook G5 is going to need to use a lot less power than that.

TyleRomeo
Apr 20, 2004, 01:44 AM
Now, they have to somehow (SOMEHOW!!!) top the AI Book... think about it... just how wonderful is the current enclosure. I'd say it's easily the coolest laptop the world has ever seen. Topping it will not be easy.


4 words

Carbon Fiber G5 Powerbook

Tyler

Snowy_River
Apr 20, 2004, 01:44 AM
...As to a 970 based portable it is very apparent that the 970FX is not ready to go into a portable and may never be ready...

Very apparent? How so? Based on what? It's not a very hot chip. It may be a little hotter than the G4, but it's cooler than chips that are used in PC laptops. Yes, there are other issues, but they have less to do with the 970FX and more to do with other aspects of the system design. So, tell me again, how is the 970FX not able to fit in a portable environment?

xtekdiver
Apr 20, 2004, 01:50 AM
If that's the case screw apple. I'm not waiting over a year for a high performance Apple laptop. And don't tell me the current 1.5Ghz laptop is high performance. Apple users are falling into the Mhz myth. Reality time. PC laptops outperform Apple's *books. I'll get an IBM. :mad: Here's a realization Apple better get in a freaking hurry. If they are going to charge a premium for their laptops they DAMN well better have performance to go with it and if not they better change their price scheme accordingly.
This is NOT cool.

I don't agree with this statement at all. I own a Dell Inspiron 8600 with a 1.4GHz Centrino chip and my Powerbook 1GHz G4 is hands down superior to it. Benchmarks are not really telling in the real world. I find that XP is not very effecient and bogs down quite a bit. The system will hang momentarily while its doing something. OS X on the other hand is smooth as silk and seems to manage its memory better. Windows requires frequent reboots, especially after hibernation. The Powerbook never requires this! I move back and forth from home and work with no trouble. How much time have I wasted waiting for the dam thing to reboot? The Dell sucks. No DVI support, and it can't handle moving around to different networks gracefully; if frequently looses it's IP address and refuses to renew it. Forget it, Windows is a hassle so who cares if it's benchmarks are a little higher, I am far more productive on OS X than XPl; I'll take a G4 over a Centrino any day. And I havn't mentioned the amazing design Apple products have. My powerbook driving a 20" cinema display is a beautiful addition to my living room and quite the conversation piece. All I really need now is a 30" display to replace it. :cool:

Snowy_River
Apr 20, 2004, 01:51 AM
...Do you actually think Apple will just stick a G5 into the existing AI Book and be done with it? Not only will the book need new innards internally to make the G5 a reality, but it'll need a slick new enclosure.

...

We just got these new AI Books about a year ago... I got the first 17" PB and I remember it came sometime in April. Why would Apple throw out all of the R&D it took to develop such an amazing enclosure to just abandon it in a year's time! Those who thought G5 Books were coming out are simply MAD....

First, it's 'AL', not 'AI'. 'AL' or 'Al' as in aluminum, the material the case is made from.

Second, sit a couple of industrial designers down for a week and they'd come up with a half a dozen new design possibilities. Spend another week doing focus group studies to determine which design has the greatest consumer appeal. Then send the designs to Steve Jobs for a week so he can decide which model he likes best, regardless of what the consumer focus groups say. Presto, in under a month you have a new design. It really doesn't take that much time. (This is, of course, grossly over-simplified, but I hope that you get my point...)

Finally, I agree that Apple will most likely put the G5 in a new skin when it enters into the PowerBook arena. However, I don't agree that Apple cares one bit how long the AL Book appearance has been around, or that that will have any influence on when they release the G5 PBs.

chasingapple
Apr 20, 2004, 02:10 AM
WANT WANT WANT WANT, good lord to you hear yourselves? I admit I read these rantings cause they provide e with entertainment, but cmon, lol. You guys are bitching for the sake of Bitching! Had Apple released a 1.6ghz G5 you would claim they should have put a 1.8 or 2.0 in it. Or the Display would not be updated and you would bitch about that, or the damn Superdrive would not have been fast enough, blah blah blah.

If you really are that pissed either get over it or head back to the Windows world, Bill is waiting for you. OS X is so god damn efficient that even a 1Ghz G4 is blazing fast, wake up people.

baby duck monge
Apr 20, 2004, 02:12 AM
4 words

Carbon Fiber G5 Powerbook

Tyler

the heat issues would be much better, but you would open up the whole realm of shattering-based accidents. meh, totally worth it. :rolleyes: :cool:

adamjay
Apr 20, 2004, 02:15 AM
your signature says you're running a dual 500 mhz G4 tower. And yet a 1.5 Ghz powerbook "wouldn't even come close" to meeting your needs? :rolleyes:

ha, no kidding... i pay the rent with Audio App's too and this 867 12" with only 256k L2 Cache is smokin' with everything i need to do with it.

hell if i bought a 1.5ghz today, it would almost be a waste of money.

on another note... screw the G5, i didn't pay for Ghz... i paid for OSX.
for all the PC Comparisons... fine people then get your 3ghz plastic p.o.s. and we'll see you in 6 months after you are fed up with the worms, viruses, and spywares.

tazzie04
Apr 20, 2004, 02:27 AM
Look i as an apple reseller do not believe that waiting on a g5 lappi is a bad thin would you want to buy something thats going to break down after a week hell no

Just remember good things come to those who wait :D

fatbarstard
Apr 20, 2004, 02:37 AM
I don't care about getting flamed but I care about heat...

Look people... the G5 is a great chip and a real advance over what can be done with systems etc etc... but the thing is like a mini furnace!!! It pumps out heat like there is no tomorrow. Now those who are brave enough to run a PB G4 on their bare knees will appreaciate that any increase in heat has got to be a very bad thing.

I'll say it again. There will be no PB G5 until the heat issue is solved. End of story. Period. That's it. There is no more.

once Apple gets around this problem, and they will, then it will be all on for young and old... I've got a PB 17" on a three year lease with one year just about up so in two years I'll be ready. Apple would dearly love to have a PB G5 out and about soon but it also has to deal to the PM range first so that it can get traction on the desktop market - which isn't exactly going as well as it should be if Apple Q2 numbers are any indication.

A PB G5 with fully optimised 64bit software would be an amazing thing... but were just going to have to wait. G4 is a perfectly capabale workhorse for the next 12 months at least....

Exits stage left....

zer0army
Apr 20, 2004, 02:49 AM
OK, after the massive explosion in replies that happened in the PowerBook release annoucement thread, I think we should have some kind of condensed, FAQ-like digest which will only take a few minutes to read, but which will convey all of the necessary points. Basically this FAQ is a collection of phrases which you can arrange as you will. You can pose them as questions or statements, mostly just by changing around a few key words and punctuation marks. Go ahead...experiment...mix'n'match!!! It's just like wasting hours reading the real forum!!!

- This is a disappointing update. Still no sign of the G5. Motorola sucks. I will not even consider a PowerBook until it has a 5GHz G5. Dude, I'm getting a Dell.

- Nobody needs a G5 PowerBook. Hell, most people don't even need a G4 PowerBook...it's just wasted processing power. I'm running PhotoShop, Illustrator, Final Cut Pro, GarageBand, Logic and Unreal Tournament 2004 all simultaneously on my 266MHz G3 PowerBook and it runs GREAT!!!. I deeply resent any suggestion that anyone needs more processing power than me. I am the benchmark.

- I can buy a 3.4GHz Dell Inspiron for $29.95 and have it personally delivered by Michael Dell. Only a fool would by a PowerBook.

- That Dell weighs 27.9kg and is made out of cardboard. I know, I worked in an office where we had 5000 Dell Inspirons and they all failed. Every single one of them. My 300MHz G3 toilet-seat iBook runs faster than those things anyway. MHz myth!!! MHz myth!!! Only a fool would buy a Dell. Their support staff are all in India, and instead of sending replacement parts they send stale pappadums.

- Nice updates, but I wish they had 1024MB of video RAM as an option. That would make that slow GeForce FX 5200 FLY!!!!

- 4MB of VRAM is way too much. If anything Apple should get rid of the VRAM chips and replace them with a small image of Steve Jobs. The GeForce FX 5200 in my 12" PowerBook runs UT2004 at 500fps. I don't know what you're talking about. Go back to the Wintel world, fanboi.

- <groan> I only ordered a pallet-full of the old 17" PowerBooks yesterday!!!

- You fool. You should have followed the PowerBook rumours. They've all been 100% reliable. We've had new PowerBooks released every Tuesday since January, you idiot!!!

Does anyone else want to add anything else?

I don't post much but i gotta say.....Hilarious! keep it up, best post of any powerbook thread....ever :D

Maverick
Apr 20, 2004, 02:55 AM
WANT WANT WANT WANT, good lord to you hear yourselves? I admit I read these rantings cause they provide e with entertainment, but cmon, lol. You guys are bitching for the sake of Bitching! Had Apple released a 1.6ghz G5 you would claim they should have put a 1.8 or 2.0 in it. Or the Display would not be updated and you would bitch about that, or the damn Superdrive would not have been fast enough, blah blah blah.

If you really are that pissed either get over it or head back to the Windows world, Bill is waiting for you. OS X is so god damn efficient that even a 1Ghz G4 is blazing fast, wake up people.

Couldn't have said it better myself. :)

aswitcher
Apr 20, 2004, 02:55 AM
4 words

Carbon Fiber G5 Powerbook

Tyler


MMmmm. Wonder how much lighter that will make them?

And what colour/shade...

oingoboingo
Apr 20, 2004, 02:59 AM
I don't care about getting flamed but I care about heat...

Look people... the G5 is a great chip and a real advance over what can be done with systems etc etc... but the thing is like a mini furnace!!! It pumps out heat like there is no tomorrow. Now those who are brave enough to run a PB G4 on their bare knees will appreaciate that any increase in heat has got to be a very bad thing.

Are you sure about the G5 heat dissipation, especially the newer PowerPC 970FX? My understanding is that the G5 isn't a whole lot hotter than the G4. The huge heatsink and fans in the G5 PowerMac are designed that way to allow near-silent cooling of the entire system, rather than to cope with a furnace-like heat output from the G5. The G5 certainly runs much cooler than some of the Pentium 4 chips currently used in shipping x86 notebooks.

According to an article on the PowerPC 970 from arstechnica (link below), the original 0.13um 1.8GHz G5 CPU produces 42 watts...compared to the 2.8GHz Pentium 4 which produces 68.4 watts, and the 1GHz G4e which produces 30 watts. So you're looking at less than a 50% increase in heat output for an 80% increase in core frequency. It also mentions that at 1.2GHz, the first-gen PowerPC 970 produces only 19W...11W less than a G4e running at a 200MHz slower clock speed. The newer 0.09um 970FX G5s will be cooler than this, but as was highlighted in the recent Apple financial results conference call, is being held up because of manufacturing delays at IBM.

I should just clarify this...I'm not saying that heat issues with the G5 probably aren't going to be a major factor in the redesign of the PowerBook G5...I'm just saying that from what I've read, it doesn't seem that the G5 chip actually is 'the mini furnace' that many people claim. It's actually quite a bit cooler than CPUs already being used in common x86 notebooks. It shouldn't be an insurmountable issue for Apple...and I think 'G5 heat issues' are a red herring in a lot of product discussions around here too. As I mentioned before, it seems that PowerMac G5 updates are more likely delayed because of chip shortages from IBM, rather than the oft-repeated reason in these forums of "Apple can't keep the faster G5s cool!!!! OMFG!!!! HOT HOT HOT!!!!"

Does anyone have more up-to-date heat dissipation figures for the PowerPC 970 and the new PowerPC 970FX?

http://www.arstechnica.com/cpu/02q2/ppc970/ppc970-1.html

PPC970FX
Apr 20, 2004, 03:04 AM
Well I think that the reason for this speed dumb was just to make a bigger thing out of the new ATI 9700 64/128MB

The cards that were on the G4 PB before was crap. But now it is the best you can get. The CPU you juse is almost never over 1,33Ghz. But it is always nice to have som bakcup.

Go apple.

iChan
Apr 20, 2004, 03:05 AM
If IBM can get two PowerPC 970s in a blade server, why can't Apple get one in a laptop!

even apple themselves have gotten two of those babies into a blade server... the expertise is definitely there...

advocate
Apr 20, 2004, 03:05 AM
There are other similar scenarios whereby a G5 powerbook with true bandwidth and ability to offer more RAM would be welcomed with open arms.
Current PowerBooks would be able to support more RAM if more RAM slots were added. The current models can address 4GB RAM. They have two SODIMM slots. Are you telling me that someone is holding a pair of SODIMMs, each with a capacity greater than 2GB, and wondering when they'll be able to install them into a PowerBook? Not likely.

The largest PC2700 SODIMM I can find on Crucial (http://www.crucial.com/)'s web site is 1GB. And let me tell you, a current model PowerBook can handle a pair of those with no problem, if you can afford the associated price tag. Would make the thing fly, too, since (assuming a majority of these "It's too slow" whiners aren't actually keeping an eye on the CPU usage) in my experience the real bottleneck while running Pro apps is in swapping memory to disk and back. Need even more? Just wait until the 2GB SODIMMs become available, and install a pair of those. Still no problem with the current models.

While I agree that the newest series of processors will eventually make it into the PowerBook, I don't agree that it's overdue or even due now. That's not to say that nobody needs a faster computer. Everybody wants a faster computer, some people even really need a faster computer. Just wait until the technology is available and suitable for use in a portable. If you really need raw power now, then you can buy a real workhorse big iron UNIX workstation or compute server for many many times the cost of any desktop.

CmdrLaForge
Apr 20, 2004, 03:06 AM
First, I wouldn't put much stock in the "two year" comparison to the G4. Its this guys job to do the PR spin. As another poster pointed out, if PBG5's were being released tomorrow, this guy would still plug the G4 until morning. What He's a marketing executive doing an interview on the day they released refreshed PBG4's. What's he going to say, 'Yeah, the G4 is on it's last leg and this update is really just to keep sales going until the PBG5 is released in a few months. But please, dont let that discourage you from plunking down a couple grand on these beautiful "new" G4PBs. He's got to allude to a time far off (2 years), otherwise, there's no justification for buying one of these updated models. They said the same thing about the G3 in ibooks last year. When questioned about the possibility of a G4 iBook they replied with something to the effect that 'we believe the G3 has a lot of life left in it.' Yeah right, like any of us believed that. Though I knew that statement was garbage, they actually put the G4 in the iBook sooner that I expected. I wasn't expecting a G4 in the iBook until the PBG5 it.

Secondly, I've heard many people say that we don't truly 'need' the power of a PBG5 and that the G4 can handle everyday tasks. This is true, we don't 'need' that much power yet. In addition, those same people throw out accusations that we're just vain in wanting the "latest and newest technology". While this may be true for some, it is not for all. People making those claims are forgetting the users like me who upgrade once only 5-6 years. I'm currently on an iBook 366mghz G3 and am ready to upgrade. I've filled my hard drive with Photos and Music and have finally maxed out this computer. While I don't need the power of a G5 today, and could get by with a G4, I'm looking ahead long term. I cannot afford to upgrade every 2 years like some, and I want a powerbook that is going to last me 5+ years. I don't see this future for the G4. The G5 and 64bit is the direction Apple is moving. While the OS X may not support 64bit for another year (or maybe even more), that is the direction we're going, and I want a computer that can support that growth. Its not the raw processing power of the G5 I want, but rather it's potential to take advantate of the direction Apple is headed. My G3 has served me well, but is on its last leg. I got 6 years out of it. I just don't see the PBG4s as having this type of longevity at this point. I could care less about the 'power' of the G5, I just want it because it's not going to be an obsolete processor in a year. The G4 is going the direction of the G3.

Finally, the PBG5 could come in June or it could come in Jan. Who knows. Either way, it's going to make it to the PB faster than the G4 did. The 2yr analogy doesn't hold water. That was several years ago, a different time. Technology has changed. Portables were not as commonplace, and we're seeing a trend of people wanting the portability over the desktop. This is going to speed things up. Plus, back when then, they didn't have the Xserve. We know that they can get a G5 in a small thin enclosure and control the heat. Not to say that PBG5's are around the corner simply because of the Xserve, but it's not going to be any two years. I agree with others who said 'if you need a PB now, buy it now', 'if you can wait, wait'. I desperately want one, but cannot force myself to pay for a processor thats on its way out the door. Waiting only a few months to purchase a PB could result in a few years of extra use. A PBG4, I may get a good 2 years. A PBG5, I definitely get 5-6 years out of it. Given what I've said, I don't think the PBG5 is as far off as the marketing clown leads us to believe. I understand that if you wait for the newest technology, you'll always be waiting. However, in the case of where we know the G4 is on its way out, a few months patience now could result in years of extra use.


I really second that. Everything you said makes sense to me and I agree on it. I am in a similar situation. I currently use an iBook G3 900Mhz which works still perfect for me. I have no need for that much speed, but I have a need for a computer that lasts 5-7 years. I will not purchase old technology thats outdated soon after I bought it. That happened to me already with the G3. And of course I don't blame Apple for progress.

aswitcher
Apr 20, 2004, 03:11 AM
I really second that. Everything you said makes sense to me and I agree on it. I am in a similar situation. I currently use an iBook G3 900Mhz which works still perfect for me. I have no need for that much speed, but I have a need for a computer that lasts 5-7 years. I will not purchase old technology thats outdated soon after I bought it. That happened to me already with the G3. And of course I don't blame Apple for progress.

Mmm. But how long...it could be January 2005 announcement for an even later release...

I am very tempted by the 17, its features and new pricing...

evilgEEk
Apr 20, 2004, 03:15 AM
Wow, I can't believe I just read so many posts when I could have simply read OingoBoingo's post and been just as informed. Which was absolutely hilarious!

But there have been some people in this thread that do make some very good points.

I'm rather torn right now. I would love to have a G5 PB, but I really don't think it's very likely to happen anytime soon. But being as I'm currently in the market for a new PB it would piss me off beyond all reason if I were to buy a new PB in Q4 just to have the G5 released at MWSF '05.

I don't think it will happen. I too am convinced that the G5 PB will be the next generation of design and have a sleek and sexy new case. The G5 chip is so hot that Apple is going to have to fix that before they even think about putting it into a laptop. Last year I bought a 1ghz TiBook and that thing got pretty damn hot when I had it on my lap, especially during summer and I was wearing shorts! Yikes!

I had to sell my TiBook to help pay for a surgery for my wife, so this year I'm going to buy another PB, most likely in August/September. And I will be buying a 15" 1.5Ghz and will be MORE than happy. That 1ghz TiBook just absolutely SCREAMED...I don't care what some stupid benchmark test says, that TiBook ran circles around my buddy's 2.6Ghz Dell piece of crap...and it was ugly..

Which brings me to my last point. I personally didn't buy a TiBook only because it was the most powerful laptop on the market with the best OS ever created and overall perfect...I bought it because it was so damn sexy! Sure you can go buy a Dell and have a 3" piece of plastic sittin on your lap cutting off circulation to your legs because it's so heavy...if that's what you want to do, do it. But I want somethin that's powerful and sexy, and the PB series is just that. The design is unmatched, and to me that's worth an extra couple hundred bucks.

I can't afford to be upgrading PB's every one or two years...my next purchase this fall will need to last me quite some time, and if the G5 PB does happen to come out in january then oh well. If you wait for the newest technology to come out you'll never actually buy anything, you'll just sit around and complain because it's not out yet. Sheesh...

So say what you will about Apple droppin the ball, but I can't wait to get my new 15" PB (and likely my wife a 12" PB). It'll be great! Can't wait for that 128mb ATI card in a laptop! Amazing!

Oh, one more thing that's rather off topic...Some have said that there's no need for a G5 in a laptop right now...if you need that power get a desktop. Well, what do you think the 17" PB's are being marketed as? A desktop replacement!

:D

eSnow
Apr 20, 2004, 03:43 AM
Maybe dual 1GHZ or dual 1.25GHZ for the 15 and 17 powerbooks. and bump the 12' to a single 1.5GHZ and max out the ibooks at 1.33GHZ and 1.25 for the 12 inch with a 167MHZ bus. What do you guys think?

Here comes the nuclear laptop...
No, absolutely freaking no way. The G4's are hot as they are, cramming two into a PowerBook is impossible. Have you seen the heat sinks in the last Dual G4 tower revision? You would not want to have a notebook 20cm thick now, would you?

The future is G5 (single).

CmdrLaForge
Apr 20, 2004, 03:46 AM
Mmm. But how long...it could be January 2005 announcement for an even later release...

I am very tempted by the 17, its features and new pricing...

But you don't have a Mac yet ? Right ? I have one - and it will serve me and my needs well into middle '05.

And as soon as I think I need the new machine for any reason. I will not wait because in these forums anyone claims that new machines come next tuesday, instead I will buy it when I need it. Period.

Cheers

gotohamish
Apr 20, 2004, 03:57 AM
BBC reports (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3639825.stm) on the PowerBook/iBook updates today.

In the article, Greg Joswiak refused to speculate about the target for a PowerBook G5 introduction, but did state that "it will be some time before that processor [G5] will be in a notebook". He also points to the long lead time that it took for the G4 to make it into portables when it was first introduced.

With forums likes this, Apple can see that a lot of people are holding off buying as they think the next line with be G5s - he has to say something to make people get their money out.

h

gotohamish
Apr 20, 2004, 04:09 AM
Wow, I can't believe I just read so many posts when I could have simply read OingoBoingo's post and been just as informed. Which was absolutely hilarious!

But there have been some people in this thread that do make some very good points.

I'm rather torn right now. I would love to have a G5 PB, but I really don't think it's very likely to happen anytime soon. But being as I'm currently in the market for a new PB it would piss me off beyond all reason if I were to buy a new PB in Q4 just to have the G5 released at MWSF '05.

I don't think it will happen. I too am convinced that the G5 PB will be the next generation of design and have a sleek and sexy new case. The G5 chip is so hot that Apple is going to have to fix that before they even think about putting it into a laptop. Last year I bought a 1ghz TiBook and that thing got pretty damn hot when I had it on my lap, especially during summer and I was wearing shorts! Yikes!

I had to sell my TiBook to help pay for a surgery for my wife, so this year I'm going to buy another PB, most likely in August/September. And I will be buying a 15" 1.5Ghz and will be MORE than happy. That 1ghz TiBook just absolutely SCREAMED...I don't care what some stupid benchmark test says, that TiBook ran circles around my buddy's 2.6Ghz Dell piece of crap...and it was ugly..

Which brings me to my last point. I personally didn't buy a TiBook only because it was the most powerful laptop on the market with the best OS ever created and overall perfect...I bought it because it was so damn sexy! Sure you can go buy a Dell and have a 3" piece of plastic sittin on your lap cutting off circulation to your legs because it's so heavy...if that's what you want to do, do it. But I want somethin that's powerful and sexy, and the PB series is just that. The design is unmatched, and to me that's worth an extra couple hundred bucks.

I can't afford to be upgrading PB's every one or two years...my next purchase this fall will need to last me quite some time, and if the G5 PB does happen to come out in january then oh well. If you wait for the newest technology to come out you'll never actually buy anything, you'll just sit around and complain because it's not out yet. Sheesh...

So say what you will about Apple droppin the ball, but I can't wait to get my new 15" PB (and likely my wife a 12" PB). It'll be great! Can't wait for that 128mb ATI card in a laptop! Amazing!

Oh, one more thing that's rather off topic...Some have said that there's no need for a G5 in a laptop right now...if you need that power get a desktop. Well, what do you think the 17" PB's are being marketed as? A desktop replacement!

:D

I share your thinking. I'm moving abroad soon and can't take all my gear - so will be forced to sell. I have a G4 1.33 PowerMac, which will be going for sale, I love this machine. It's F A S T.

The computer I will be keeping will be my over 3 years old Powerbook G4 500. It DOESN'T scream, but it's ok. I can't take anything larger than will fit in my luggage. :-(

So, I want to upgrade, but I don't want to get a new G4 Powerbook. Obviously I want the G5, HOWEVER, I won't buy a Rev1 of it, as I made that mistake with the PBG4 Rev1 - I sent it back twice, it doesn't feel sturdy, the screen flickers etc...

I'm actually thinking iBook for a years or so, just to lay out less cash, and recoup more later on eBay! Don't worry, just my 2p, I'm not about to start an iBook vs Powerbook thread, I can work that out for myself.

Good posts though people - this is one of the best threads I've read in a while around here.

Dippo
Apr 20, 2004, 04:10 AM
Here comes the nuclear laptop...
No, absolutely freaking no way. The G4's are hot as they are, cramming two into a PowerBook is impossible. Have you seen the heat sinks in the last Dual G4 tower revision? You would not want to have a notebook 20cm thick now, would you?

The future is G5 (single).

I still think that Apple would have to come out with a Dual laptop if nothing else but for the "cool factor". It would certianly be a desktop replacement at that point. I would imagine that it would only be for the 17" Powerbook though.

vannote
Apr 20, 2004, 04:29 AM
If IBM can get two PowerPC 970s in a blade server, why can't Apple get one in a laptop!

1. A BLADE SERVER REQUIRES A 'BLADE CENTER' TO OPERATE.
2. A BLADE CENTER HAS A HUGE POWER SUPPLY
3. A BLADE CENTER HAS HUGE FANS.
4. A BLADE CENTER HAS HUGE COOLING CAPABILITIES (SEE #3).
5. A BLADE CENTER HAS HUGE AREA, UNLIKE A POWERBOOK (SEE #4).

:)

Cheers

mvc
Apr 20, 2004, 04:39 AM
OK, after the massive explosion in replies that happened in the PowerBook release annoucement thread, I think we should have some kind of condensed, FAQ-like digest which will only take a few minutes to read, but which will convey all of the necessary points…

Oingoboingo, that was a masterpiece, a true work of genius. I am not worthy to read it. Totally Brill Maate! :D :D

eSnow
Apr 20, 2004, 04:47 AM
First off, I believe the Joswiak quote is a smokescreen. It is actually wrong, since it did not take 2 years to get the G4 into a Powrebook. He is buying time and trying to revitalize Powerbook sales (which have not been that great lately).

If he is really serious, he is admitting Apple is stuck in a quagmire again. The original Titanium was delayed from its original launch date by approx. 6 month - thanks to Moto. That is why it was released with a severely outdated RAGE gfx card featuring a whopping 8MB video RAM.
It seems that history is repeating itself. IBM is seemingly unable to deliver the 90nm G5 in volume and Apple is delaying product releases accordingly. The revised Moto chips came to their rescue, but apart from pin-compatible drop-in replacements, not much has changed which leads me to believe that a redesigned PB is waiting in the pipeline. Waiting for IBM.

Secondly, would people please stop patronizing me in which computer I need (or want)? I do Java development and thanks to its small caches, the G4 is very ill-equipped for it. That it runs on a crippled FSB is not helping either. Working for clients at different places, a G5 tower is simply not an option (at least as long as gigabit ethernet is running to my home), I simply can do my work on a notebook only. I caved in in Sept. and bought myself a 1.3 Ghz Centrino after doing some hands-on tests with the then-current Powerbooks and have not really regretted it (my first ever PC - after 12 Mac-only years). Yes, windows stinks, but what should I do? All the beauty of OS X helps only so much if the hardware is slow.

BTW. the current 7447A are not the last we will see from Moto. They just moved to a smaller process (130nm if I recall right) and will surely use this to further develop the G4-line. Apple _will_ use those chips at least in their iBooks if not Powerbooks.

pigwin32
Apr 20, 2004, 05:14 AM
I don't care about getting flamed but I care about heat...

Look people... the G5 is a great chip and a real advance over what can be done with systems etc etc... but the thing is like a mini furnace!!! It pumps out heat like there is no tomorrow. Now those who are brave enough to run a PB G4 on their bare knees will appreaciate that any increase in heat has got to be a very bad thing.

I'll say it again. There will be no PB G5 until the heat issue is solved. End of story. Period. That's it. There is no more.

once Apple gets around this problem, and they will, then it will be all on for young and old... I've got a PB 17" on a three year lease with one year just about up so in two years I'll be ready. Apple would dearly love to have a PB G5 out and about soon but it also has to deal to the PM range first so that it can get traction on the desktop market - which isn't exactly going as well as it should be if Apple Q2 numbers are any indication.

A PB G5 with fully optimised 64bit software would be an amazing thing... but were just going to have to wait. G4 is a perfectly capabale workhorse for the next 12 months at least....

Exits stage left....
Bollocks to you fatbarstard (always wanted to say that). I think you maybe need to take the blinkers off. What heat issues in the G5, this has been discussed endlessly and the concensus has been that heat is not that big a deal in the 90nm chips. The heat issues are more likely to be associated with the supporting chipset.

And who is to say the heat issues haven't been solved, if you've got information to the contrary then please share. I just don't think you've really got a stake in this game, you're sitting pretty with your leased 17. Maybe you should leave the idle speculation to those of us who need a G5 PB this year.

mr_tap
Apr 20, 2004, 05:15 AM
I really second that. Everything you said makes sense to me and I agree on it. I am in a similar situation. I currently use an iBook G3 900Mhz which works still perfect for me. I have no need for that much speed, but I have a need for a computer that lasts 5-7 years. I will not purchase old technology thats outdated soon after I bought it. That happened to me already with the G3. And of course I don't blame Apple for progress.

I am also patiently (sometimes not so patiently) waiting for the powerbook G5. I suspect that we will not have to wait until Jan 05 though - Digitimes is reporting that Compal (who makes the PB17) has won a contract to make 15.4" widescreen powerbooks for Apple shipping in the second half of this year (http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/Article.asp?datePublish=2003/06/13&pages=04&seq=17).

New case has got to mean new CPU :)

CmdrLaForge
Apr 20, 2004, 05:24 AM
I am also patiently (sometimes not so patiently) waiting for the powerbook G5. I suspect that we will not have to wait until Jan 05 though - Digitimes is reporting that Compal (who makes the PB17) has won a contract to make 15.4" widescreen powerbooks for Apple shipping in the second half of this year (http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/Article.asp?datePublish=2003/06/13&pages=04&seq=17).

New case has got to mean new CPU :)

WOW ! Thats interesting news !!! It says that they will ship it in the second half of this year !!! Paris expo is in september !!!

aswitcher
Apr 20, 2004, 05:25 AM
I am also patiently (sometimes not so patiently) waiting for the powerbook G5. I suspect that we will not have to wait until Jan 05 though - Digitimes is reporting that Compal (who makes the PB17) has won a contract to make 15.4" widescreen powerbooks for Apple shipping in the second half of this year (http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/Article.asp?datePublish=2003/06/13&pages=04&seq=17).

New case has got to mean new CPU :)

Nice find.

"According to sources, Compal will start shipping 15.4-inch wide-screen PowerBooks for Apple in the second half of this year, with initial monthly shipments estimated at 30,000-40,000 units. Compal is currently producing 17-inch PowerBooks, while Quanta Computer and Asustek Computer are contract manufacturing the 15.2- and 12.1-inch models, respectively, sources said."

So if they are shipping in that quantity in second half of this year does that mean that we should see the G5 then given they wouldn't just sit on that much stuff. QED Paris for G5s????

pigwin32
Apr 20, 2004, 05:30 AM
WANT WANT WANT WANT, good lord to you hear yourselves? I admit I read these rantings cause they provide e with entertainment, but cmon, lol. You guys are bitching for the sake of Bitching! Had Apple released a 1.6ghz G5 you would claim they should have put a 1.8 or 2.0 in it. Or the Display would not be updated and you would bitch about that, or the damn Superdrive would not have been fast enough, blah blah blah.

If you really are that pissed either get over it or head back to the Windows world, Bill is waiting for you. OS X is so god damn efficient that even a 1Ghz G4 is blazing fast, wake up people.
Get off your high horse, we're not bitching, if you take a look at the subject line and ignore the normal line noise you'll see there's some serious speculation happening here with a little humour thrown in. Isn't that what it's all about? If you want to discuss OSX why don't you take yourself over to the panther forum (http://forums.macrumors.com/forumdisplay.php?f=61). Unless of course you *are* the VP of hardware product marketing in which case you really need to stop relying on the OSX team to save your sorry ass.

centauratlas
Apr 20, 2004, 05:41 AM
Also, the G4 is not going to be obsolete anytime soon. Apple will be supporting it for the next 3-5 yrs.

And this is exactly why I am waiting on a PB G5. I keep my machines longer than that - I just got rid of some quite old machines (5 old Macs to be exact including a 6100 and 7100 (yes they were old, but with Sonnet upgrades) and a blue and whie G3). If I am going to spend $4000 on a new PB, I don't want to buy something that Apple will stop supporting in 3 years or even 5 years.

It isn't about "dick size" as someone so classlessly put it. It is about protecting your investment in hardware. It is about having a machine which will be able to take the place of the desktop when needed.

There may be people who DON'T have a reason to buy it, but dismissing everyone just because YOU don't is disingenuous.

rdowns
Apr 20, 2004, 05:42 AM
Mmm. But how long...it could be January 2005 announcement for an even later release...

I am very tempted by the 17, its features and new pricing...

You've been talking about switiching for months. Just do it already!

centauratlas
Apr 20, 2004, 05:46 AM
Very apparent? How so? Based on what? It's not a very hot chip. It may be a little hotter than the G4, but it's cooler than chips that are used in PC laptops. Yes, there are other issues, but they have less to do with the 970FX and more to do with other aspects of the system design. So, tell me again, how is the 970FX not able to fit in a portable environment?

Exactly. The bus is the major problem given the increased speed and hence increased heat generation.

Thank you for saying that. I was going to, but you beat me to it.

I read about the "Mhz myth" but the real myth is that the 970fx is "so much hotter" than the G4 running at equiv speeds. The only *facts* that anyone quotes with links show the G5 and G4 using roughly equiv power at equiv speeds. For all the people saying that it is a "heat pump" compared to the G4, please show us a link. There are plenty of links from IBM on here showing the opposite. The bus is another issue of course.

mr_tap
Apr 20, 2004, 05:46 AM
Nice find.


Actually, I might not be as clever as I thought I was - I am now suspecting that it is an article from last year :(

aswitcher
Apr 20, 2004, 05:49 AM
Actually, I might not be as clever as I thought I was - I am now suspecting that it is an article from last year :(

Indeed it is. So what happen? Did they cancel or are they beavering away right now putting them in 15" G5s due out at WWDC!

eSnow
Apr 20, 2004, 05:50 AM
Digitimes is reporting that Compal (who makes the PB17) has won a contract to make 15.4" widescreen powerbooks for Apple shipping in the second half of this year (http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/Article.asp?datePublish=2003/06/13&pages=04&seq=17).



Uhm, not to rain on your parade - the article is dated 13th June 2003.... :p

slipper
Apr 20, 2004, 06:14 AM
4 words

Carbon Fiber G5 Powerbook

Tyler
bro that is an awesome idea. case bending, NO MORE! to bad carbon fiber in its raw form cost around $50 per square foot.

jouster
Apr 20, 2004, 06:47 AM
OK, after the massive explosion in replies that happened in the PowerBook release annoucement thread, I think we should have some kind of condensed, FAQ-like digest..........<snip>...........Does anyone else want to add anything else?

That was pretty funny. Heh, no need to read the entire thread now!

QuiteSure
Apr 20, 2004, 06:55 AM
I have been editing a 1/2 hour documentary using FCP on my dual 2.0 G5. While scrubbing, the fans kick into high gear. I could not imagine a sound like that coming from a powerbook. I bought a 12" PB last fall, and I love it. I would rather Apple wait to get the G5 pb right than rush it out.

gekko513
Apr 20, 2004, 07:00 AM
A bit off topic
We've received more reports that Apple is expecting its employees to be on hand next week as well as extended hours... presumably in preparation for new product releases.
What's so special about the new Books that require Apple employees to work extended hours?

SiliconAddict
Apr 20, 2004, 07:06 AM
Something tells me that even if 7 GHz Uberbook G15's came out tomorrow you still wouldn't be satisfied.

Go ahead and switch. It won't hurt my feelings. :rolleyes:

I'd be satisfied at seeing a G5 PowerBook that is somewhat future poof being a 64-bit CPU, and that has performance matching or at least nearly matching its competition. The single barefeats.com benchmark comparison between last falls G4 PowerBooks, a bunch of Pentium M's, and 2 mobile Pentium 4's showed that the G4 was anywhere from 20%-30% to a whopping 50% slower then the competition. No freaking way in hell I'm spending aprox $3,500 (Pricing it out it was closer to $4,000) on a 17" PowerBook with that kind of performance gap. Screw all the cute little special touches Apple puts in their systems. If it can't even keep up with the competition why should I shell out over 3 grand on a laptop?
I couldn't care less about your feelings. I do care that there are other PC users that feel the exact same way I feel about the PowerBooks craptastic performance. Apple puts on a nice show of how sexy the PowerBook is (And is is.) and what features they have. (and its packed.) But when it comes to the systems speed....well..maybe I missed it on their site but I’ve NEVER seen a recent benchmark comparing speeds equal to the PC platform. It’s a misdirection game on the part of Apple.

[Update]
http://www.barefeats.com/al15b.html

gotohamish
Apr 20, 2004, 07:32 AM
bro that is an awesome idea. case bending, NO MORE! to bad carbon fiber in its raw form cost around $50 per square foot. Sssshhhh... Don't tell Arn, he may discover a world carbon fibre shortage article :D ;) :)

cb911
Apr 20, 2004, 07:43 AM
hhmmm... they've been saying that for quite a while now... i'm feeling that they are just buying time, in case their release schedule is messed up because of unavailability of chips.

but it would be reasonable to see another G4 PowerBook release. think about it. the ones just realeased are only Rev. B, and if they released 1.8GHz PowerBook G4s that would probably keep people going... it's just that as soon as they released the G5 PowerMac no one could stop dreaming about having that in a PowerBook. :p

i think they also want to keep this really hush-hush. after what happened with the Rev.A AlBooks.... there were whispers that they've have a Moto chip with all sorts of goodies like increased clock speed, 1MB L2cache and killer stuff like that. well i was follwing those rumors very closely getting all hyped up on this killer chip that Moto was working on, and then it wasn't all that great anyway. but i'd much prefer that Apple keep the lid on the PowerBook G5... and then just surprise us with whatever they've got. :D

garybooberry
Apr 20, 2004, 07:44 AM
The PowerBook (especially at the prices they are asking) is supposed to be Apple's "top of the line" desktop replacement. The problem is, their current pro desktop is so wickedly fast that their laptop line isn't able to match par with it anymore.

Sure, the PowerBook is still the choice of videographers, photographers and designers on the go, but they arel putting processors in them that are a scant 250 MHz above the EOL'd G4 tower.

Three thousand dollars kids - for a 1.5 G4 processor. I'm sure there is market for these laptops, I'm just not it.

Spagolli94
Apr 20, 2004, 07:49 AM
Oh the pain! The horror!

Joswiak made similar comments before, with the same "not anytime soon" line. I'll look for it.

Def. not good news...

Edit: Here is the MacCentral Article (http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/06/24/future/index.php?redirect=1082406684000).



That was from June 2003 btw. Not much has changed in almost a year. :(

Sure it has... The G4 PB is a whopping 10% (or whatever) faster!

Fitzcaraldo
Apr 20, 2004, 07:57 AM
I concur. I'm a professional editor who has both a desktop and a laptop. To me, I would gain more benefit from a dual G4 17" Powerbook than a single G5 Powerbook. Nonetheless, I'm upgrading my 1ghz TiBook to a 1.5ghz Albook. 50% speed increase is worth it.

It seems to me that the people who do all the whining are the very people who don't actually -need- the machines. Its about dick measuring. Single Processor G4s, clock for clock, aren't that much slower than a single processor G5 -- at least on the stats I've seen.

I quite fancy the idea of a portable desktop for the purpose you mention. By this i mean the un-compromised power of the desktop combined with a piggyback clamshell screen and keyboard. An altogether better thought out portability with built in tough-box qualities would seem a nice little niche product for the traveling creative with a car. Space for a module in the keyboard (jog shuttle, or a master fader) would be nice too. :)

Fitzcaraldo

stockscalper
Apr 20, 2004, 08:04 AM
Exactly. The bus is the major problem given the increased speed and hence increased heat generation.

Thank you for saying that. I was going to, but you beat me to it.

I read about the "Mhz myth" but the real myth is that the 970fx is "so much hotter" than the G4 running at equiv speeds. The only *facts* that anyone quotes with links show the G5 and G4 using roughly equiv power at equiv speeds. For all the people saying that it is a "heat pump" compared to the G4, please show us a link. There are plenty of links from IBM on here showing the opposite. The bus is another issue of course.

If Apple were to put a G5 in a Powerbook don't expect it to run at speeds any faster than the current G4. The frontside bus would run at 233 Mhz and the chip around 1.4 to 1.6 Ghz. At those speeds the battery drain is better than the current G4 and the heat output manageable. The speed increase would be modest and noticeable. The problem with using the G5 at this time is multifold. First, they aren't in great enough production. Second, some of the supporting components are in short supply at this time. Third, the marketing folks at Apple are not pleased with the current form facor that is being used in the prototypes. As has been pointed out above there will be heat from the bus and other components and the case has to be redesigned to promote air circulation and heat dissapation. What has been shown so far are cases that are 1.25 to 1.4 inches thick, much thicker than Apple wants to see in the production model. The new G5's will not be as thin as the TI or AL books, but they are shooting for less than 1.2" in thickness and with a design that will look radically different from any laptop on the market. There all kinds of different looks being shown now, some look crappy, but some really look futuristic. By the time they get all these issues worked out IBM will likely be on the next generation 64 bit chip, the 60 micron process (they're working on it parallel with the 970 FX) and that would be my guess for what you will see in a laptop.

gotohamish
Apr 20, 2004, 08:11 AM
I quite fancy the idea of a portable desktop for the purpose you mention. By this i mean the un-compromised power of the desktop combined with a piggyback clamshell screen and keyboard. An altogether better thought out portability with built in tough-box qualities would seem a nice little niche product for the traveling creative with a car. Space for a module in the keyboard (jog shuttle, or a master fader) would be nice too. :)

Fitzcaraldo

I see your point, however, I think the issue is more than WANT. It's still about NEED.

I NEED a portable for my work and travel. I WANT a G5. Well, know what? I can't have one. So if I absolutely HAVE to have a new computer, I'd get a Powerbook. Then upgrade to the G5 model later. NEED and WANT are powerful things.

Let's do benchmarks for NEED vs WANT.

JtheLemur
Apr 20, 2004, 08:15 AM
1. A BLADE SERVER REQUIRES A 'BLADE CENTER' TO OPERATE.
2. A BLADE CENTER HAS A HUGE POWER SUPPLY
3. A BLADE CENTER HAS HUGE FANS.
4. A BLADE CENTER HAS HUGE COOLING CAPABILITIES (SEE #3).
5. A BLADE CENTER HAS HUGE AREA, UNLIKE A POWERBOOK (SEE #4).


6. Turn off caps lock.

7. All a blade server is missing to operate on its own technically is a power supply and cooling.

8. Obviously and regardless of support structure needed, the point was IBM has shoehorned dual 970s into a blade form factor. If they can do that, Apple can get one into a PowerBook form factor.

9. Relax.

Nemesis
Apr 20, 2004, 08:21 AM
Oh the pain! The horror!

Edit: Here is the MacCentral Article (http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/06/24/future/index.php?redirect=1082406684000).

That was from June 2003 btw. Not much has changed in almost a year. :(

Welcome to Apple's world. :(
Those guys INDEED have a G5 PBook, but still think they can milk some money out that old G4 cow ...

Nemesis
Apr 20, 2004, 08:28 AM
he frontside bus would run at 233 Mhz and the chip around 1.4 to 1.6 Ghz.

Sorry, but that's *********. PC laptops run at faster processor speeds and have faster busses, and nobody complains about it. And they're pretty THIN too, even with DVD burner. Thise new Toshibas and Sony's kick ass!
So, lets make some sense, please. :mad:

Fitzcaraldo
Apr 20, 2004, 08:29 AM
Well... yeah... so do I... but... oh, you know what I mean! :D

Yes we know what you mean :D

Power and portability will always be an issue, and handle on desktops don't quite answer the need they address? The current Desktops don't fulfill my needs and powerbooks address an entirely different crowd. while i continue to want (=Need for the laid back chilled types) a truly portable desktop would suit me very nicely for doing the prep work while i wait for the power i need to fulfill my creative ideas. ;)

SiliconAddict
Apr 20, 2004, 08:43 AM
The PowerBook (especially at the prices they are asking) is supposed to be Apple's "top of the line" desktop replacement. The problem is, their current pro desktop is so wickedly fast that their laptop line isn't able to match par with it anymore.

Sure, the PowerBook is still the choice of videographers, photographers and designers on the go, but they arel putting processors in them that are a scant 250 MHz above the EOL'd G4 tower.

Three thousand dollars kids - for a 1.5 G4 processor. I'm sure there is market for these laptops, I'm just not it.

Mhz is relative. I hoping no one here is expecting a 2Ghz+ G5 CPU in a PowerBook when they are released. But even a 1.5-1.6Ghz G5 will most likely be able to kick out performance superior to a 1.5 G4 simply because they support a FSB greater then what is being currently offered by the G4.
And, at least for me, I'm not expecting Apple's PowerBook line to jump across the 2Ghz line anytime soon. Personally I'm OK with that, as long as they bring the rest of the dang system up to a respectable speed so the combined system speed is comparable to a PC laptop.
The entire PowerBook line needs a major overhaul and my growing fear is that to do that Apple is going back to the drawing board, which means a time frame greater then last falls 1 year est until a G5 would hit the market. I hope to god I'm wrong but unless Jobs displays a working G5 PowerBook at WWDC with a release timeframe of 4th quarter, I'm starting to think I could be right. :(

eSnow
Apr 20, 2004, 08:47 AM
If Apple were to put a G5 in a Powerbook don't expect it to run at speeds any faster than the current G4. The frontside bus would run at 233 Mhz and the chip around 1.4 to 1.6 Ghz. At those speeds the battery drain is better than the current G4 and the heat output manageable. [...] As has been pointed out above there will be heat from the bus and other components and the case has to be redesigned to promote air circulation and heat dissapation. What has been shown so far are cases that are 1.25 to 1.4 inches thick,

I believe, you are contradicting yourself here. If the battery drain is lower for a 1.4 - 1.6Ghz 970FX than a 7447A (which is highly likely), then the power uptake of the CPU is lower as well. Which means less heat given off than in current PBs.

Apple should be able to move the system controller to a 90nm process if this is the chip that produces so much heat, instead of waiting another 18 month till IBM gets the design down to 65nm. At least some bright heads at Apple have to notice that the G4 is bandwidth-starved - 233Mhz DDR is much better than 167Mhz DDR with a hacked RAM interface.

jayscheuerle
Apr 20, 2004, 08:58 AM

stockscalper
Apr 20, 2004, 09:02 AM
Not contradicting myself; the power drain at 1.4 ghz is around 12 watts, which compares favorably to the G4 at 22 or 23 watts. However, when you crank it up to 1.8 ghz it jumps considerably, plus the heat really pumps up at that speed. Because of those issues, it's not practical for them to use the G5 at speeds faster than 1.4 to 1.6 at this time.

mkwilson68
Apr 20, 2004, 09:03 AM
The real issue here is that we all want Apple to do well, right?

Currently, their PB's are destroyed performance-wise by the (albeit largely terrible) wintel laptops. This makes it hard to improve the sales numbers. Of course we all want a PB G5 with 8 hrs battery life with higher res screens etc. And of course the existing G4 PB's are fast enough for the vast majority of ordinary people. But many PB users are professionals in media businesses, and performance for them (us) is a need, not just a want.

So if Apple's SALES are to improve, they need the PR and performance of a G5 PB.

I too fear that we may be in for a long wait though - the G5 is still a pretty new chip and top-notch portables (and let's face it, the PB's, while not that quick, are the best designed laptops in the world) are about a gazzilion times harder to design and manufacture than desktops... and we're not exactly getting those by the boatload these days are we.

All I can say to Apple is: make them worth the wait please.

stockscalper
Apr 20, 2004, 09:08 AM
Sorry, but that's *********. PC laptops run at faster processor speeds and have faster busses, and nobody complains about it. And they're pretty THIN too, even with DVD burner. Thise new Toshibas and Sony's kick ass!
So, lets make some sense, please. :mad:

Yes, people do complain about battery life and heat issues. Have you held one of the PC laptops? They blow hot air out side vents like hot exhaust out of the rear of a Ferrari. Plus battery life is nil at those high speeds. And have you noticed how thick the cases are? Between 1.5 and 1.7 inches, not nice and thin like the Macs. The Centrinos do get better battery life and are thinner, but the clock and bus speeds are much lower too, more in line with the Macs.

The bus speed I quoted is a fast as is practical keeping in balance speed of the cpu and battery and heat issues.

uzombie
Apr 20, 2004, 09:33 AM
Yes, people do complain about battery life and heat issues. Have you held one of the PC laptops? They blow hot air out side vents like hot exhaust out of the rear of a Ferrari. Plus battery life is nil at those high speeds. And have you noticed how thick the cases are? Between 1.5 and 1.7 inches, not nice and thin like the Macs. The Centrinos do get better battery life and are thinner, but the clock and bus speeds are much lower too, more in line with the Macs....

I sold off my 1stGen PowerbookG4 because it was too hot, the battery lasted 2 hours (if that) and you couldn't play iTunes with the lid closed (there was no utility to disable the mag latch). Assuming the iPod was the solution to the latter, I still felt the powerbook was not quite ready-for-primetime. (Peeling paint, powerbook lettering transferred to lid, poor airport reception, key marks on screen, flexing lid, bad hinges, powersupply cord failure, power jack failures ...)

IMHO, the G5 will remain a staple for the workstation. Apple won't create a laptop that supercedes its bread-n-butter: the venerable, but loud, G5 desktop. Not yet anyway....

(Wait, one more soapbox moment)

So, Apple, do it right. Make a quad-G5 desktop, and a dual-G5 laptop. But please, include Bluetooth and don't make it an option!

And where are the Desktop revisions???

Done.

:eek:

Trab
Apr 20, 2004, 09:44 AM
8. Obviously and regardless of support structure needed, the point was IBM has shoehorned dual 970s into a blade form factor. If they can do that, Apple can get one into a PowerBook form factor.



If only it was that simple... There's still a big difference between fitting stuff into a 1U blade server format versus a notebook, especially a thin notebook like the Powerbooks. I have an old Sony laptop with a ~700Mhz Intel chip in it, and that thing gets pretty hot after an hour's worth of processing. I can only imagine what a high-end P4 or G5 chip would do.

Getting rid of that excess heat is not a simple task, and I'm willing to bet that Apple isn't willing to go the route that most PC laptop makers go, in having a 'portable' notebook that weighs as much as a boat anchor and has a leaf blower inside it to vent the heat out.

jamilecrire
Apr 20, 2004, 09:56 AM
I would like a desktop replacement that can adequately run Pro Tools. The powerbooks don't even come close, even with the updates. I would love it if I could reduce my audio hardware to just a g5 powerbook with a firewire interface and a small rack of outboard gear. Ahhhh...just dreaming.

Your sig says you run a dual 500MHz G4 but a 1.5GHz Powerbook won't meet your needs? I call BS. I have a P-III 1.13GHZ that is 2 years old and it is more than enough for everything I need in Windows/Linux. I am getting a Thinkpad T41 anyway because the Centrinos are very fast (1MB Cache does make a difference) and it is thin (I cannot stand trackpads so the Point-Stick is my preference).

I have a G4 Tower QS 733 and an iBook 933 (G3). The G3 kicks the sh_t out of my tower so I primarily use my iBook and ignore my 22" Cinema Display. I will buy a Powerbook once they have a G5 in them. Until then my iBook will work fine.

otter-boy
Apr 20, 2004, 09:59 AM
8. Obviously and regardless of support structure needed, the point was IBM has shoehorned dual 970s into a blade form factor. If they can do that, Apple can get one into a PowerBook form factor.


Quick comparison:

Xserve G5 (up to dual proc.)-1.73 inches (4.4 cm) high by 17.6 inches (44.7 cm) wide by 28 inches (71.1 cm) deep = 852.54 in^3 @ 33-37 lbs

PB17- Height: 1.0 inch (2.6 cm) by Width: 15.4 inches (39.2 cm) by Depth: 10.2 inches (25.9 cm) = 157.08 in^3 @ 6.9 lbs

PB12 - Height: 1.18 inches (3.0 cm) by Width: 10.9 inches (27.7 cm) by Depth: 8.6 inches (21.9 cm) = 110.61 in^3 @ 4.6 lbs

the overall volume of the Xserve is about 5.4 times bigger than the PB17 and 7.7 times bigger than the PB12. Remember that the internal volume of the PBs are greatly reduced due to the screen and keyboard which do not have analogous components in the Xserve (whereas you could say the HD, DVD drives, etc, are analogous between the two).

That Apple can get two G5s into something at least 5.4 times larger, does not mean that they can put it into a PB at the moment. However, the low 970fx yields could be creating a ripple effect across the pro lines, pushing back PM and PB updates.

1macker1
Apr 20, 2004, 10:19 AM
I for one am waiting for a G5. Do i need it now,nope. But the 64bit machine will last a lonnng time. Speaking for my self, i dont plan on buying a new computer every 2 or 3 years. I want the G5 because i know it's here for a while. It's an investment in the things to come.

john123
Apr 20, 2004, 10:31 AM
Hey! The current 1.5Ghz laptop is high performance!

No, it's not...

It's frustrating to see how many people insist that the current offerings provide more than enough power for any user.

If that's the case, then why is there any reason for G5s in the first place?

The reality is that for intensive tasks, the G4 lags. PC laptops -- heavier, uglier, etc. as they may be -- offer a more powerful mobile experience. I contend that anyone who disagrees really hasn't used PCs all that much in the first place.

The simply G5 helped Apple catch up with a performance gap with PCs that has been growing ever since the introduction of the G3. And now that Apple is more on par with its PC counterparts in terms of desktops, getting that chip into laptops needs to be a top priority, because informed power users (like me!) won't buy one of these current PowerBooks.

Bhennies
Apr 20, 2004, 10:39 AM
Your sig says you run a dual 500MHz G4 but a 1.5GHz Powerbook won't meet your needs? I call BS. I have a P-III 1.13GHZ that is 2 years old and it is more than enough for everything I need in Windows/Linux. I am getting a Thinkpad T41 anyway because the Centrinos are very fast (1MB Cache does make a difference) and it is thin (I cannot stand trackpads so the Point-Stick is my preference).

I have a G4 Tower QS 733 and an iBook 933 (G3). The G3 kicks the sh_t out of my tower so I primarily use my iBook and ignore my 22" Cinema Display. I will buy a Powerbook once they have a G5 in them. Until then my iBook will work fine.Trust me...it will NOT meet my needs. I've played around with the (now outdated) 1.33 17" set up on Pro Tools. It's not even close to enough. Only a g5 will allow the plug-in count that I need. By the way, my dual 500 tower doesn't do the trick either- not even close- in fact I've put my music on hold until I get a new g5 because I'm running Pro Tools at 99% CPU power with 1024 buffer and I still get that fun little message "CPU out of power". I have 2 record labels waiting for my EP, and I'm waiting for a new g5 and some inspiration.

~Shard~
Apr 20, 2004, 10:55 AM
I concur. I'm a professional editor who has both a desktop and a laptop. To me, I would gain more benefit from a dual G4 17" Powerbook than a single G5 Powerbook. Nonetheless, I'm upgrading my 1ghz TiBook to a 1.5ghz Albook. 50% speed increase is worth it.

It seems to me that the people who do all the whining are the very people who don't actually -need- the machines. Its about dick measuring. Single Processor G4s, clock for clock, aren't that much slower than a single processor G5 -- at least on the stats I've seen.

This is what I’ve been saying – of course there are the exceptions out there who would love a G5 PowerBooks, but even pro users, like yourself are saying they don’t absolutely need one. Now would it be NICE to have, sure, but that’s not what we’re talking about here... ;)

ifjake
Apr 20, 2004, 10:56 AM
be patient. and if you feel you must have a G5 to do what you do, get a G5 machine. pro audio and video production on a laptop is currently unrealistic. so just wait.

gopher
Apr 20, 2004, 10:56 AM
You can wait. The rest of the industry and many consumers who are interested in performance however will not. Current Pentium M laptops already kick the G4’s ***. Screw OS X. If Apple is going to neglect the hardware what’s the point?

What Pentium M can kick these numbers?

http://forgetcomputers.com/~jdroz/pages/09.html

The Pentium is nowhere close to the G4s. The problem is programs which aren't optimized for the G4. Thank goodness Apple released Motion. It will make Adobe wish they had optimized Premier sooner.

Hattig
Apr 20, 2004, 10:57 AM
For me, the issue isn't "G5 is better than G4" when it comes to laptops.

The G4 is perfectly fine, however it has some problems right now, most notably the limited bus bandwidth.

Imagine if Motorola actually put some effort into their processor and released it with a 400MHz front side bus (maybe HyperTransport, so that power consumption doesn't increase over the current bus). Hell, stick a DDR3200 memory controller on the die as well to completely circumvent the memory bandwidth issue. This could be done easily at 130nm without too much effort, and when you hit 90nm just stick another core on the processor to make a dual-core processor in the same space.

Alternatively just use 2 low-power processors in the top end Powerbooks, I'm sure the 17" can cool two ~15W processors if it tried.

But ... Motorola suck.

~Shard~
Apr 20, 2004, 10:59 AM
Why do people keep saying this? I need a faster computer and a g5 is not going to be fast enough. No computer will ever be fast enough as long as people do renderings and other stuff that takes time. I say a computer is fast enough when I never have to wait for it to finish a task, so dont give me some crap about the g4 being fast enough.
But dont get me wrong, I am not a unsatisfied powerbookuser. I take what I can get from apple (as long as I can afford it), and I am sure they do whatever they can to keep the products as good as possible.

And please dont tell me to go by a tower. I am a student, I want the possibillity to take my computer to school and home on vacations. AND I want the possibilty to work with big illustrator-, photoshop- and cad-files without waiting. I dont want to wait all night to see what a render is going to look like, before I make some changes and start the render all over.

I seriously doubt that I am one of the few who would benefit from a faster cpu. If your point is that the g5 wont be any faster than the current g4, you can of course diregard this post. Just dont tell me people dont need faster computers, it just doesnt make any sense.

First of all, there are many people, pro users included, on this forum who have already said that a G5 isn’t required right now for their work, which is what I was getting at with my initial post. I do appreciate what you would like to do though with your PowerBook, and please note that I did say there are always exceptions – there ARE people out there who could make good use of a G5 PowerBook for what they do. I just think that for lots of people it's either bragging rights, or a dillusion of "since the G5 is the new chip, I have to have it since it's the best and I NEED it".

I also appreciate the fact that many Mac users, (thanks to the longevity of Macs), only have to upgrade their systems every 3-5 years in some cases. As a result, they would like the most “bang for their buck” so to speak, and although they may not need a G5, it would be nice to have one for longevity’s sake. This is completely understandable as well.


No computer will ever be fast enough as long as people do renderings and other stuff that takes time. I say a computer is fast enough when I never have to wait for it to finish a task, so dont give me some crap about the g4 being fast enough.

I totally see where you’re coming from – and that ambitious attitude is the kind that pushes Apple’s R&D environment – never settling for what we have, and always striving to improve things, until we can do amazing, supercomputer-like tasks with ease. :cool: However, the flipside of that is, you have to be realistic - otherwise with that kind of attitude, you’re going to be one of those people that is never satisfied. You never want to wait for a task to be complete? So until you can take the entire batch of pre-rendered files of Finding Nemo and render the whole movie in 1 second, a computer won’t be fast enough? Will a computer ever be fast enough then, until the Apple G57 is released in a hundred years or so, which can read your thoughts through its psychic input system? ;)

gopher
Apr 20, 2004, 10:59 AM
Trust me...it will NOT meet my needs. I've played around with the (now outdated) 1.33 17" set up on Pro Tools. It's not even close to enough. Only a g5 will allow the plug-in count that I need. By the way, my dual 500 tower doesn't do the trick either- not even close- in fact I've put my music on hold until I get a new g5 because I'm running Pro Tools at 99% CPU power with 1024 buffer and I still get that fun little message "CPU out of power". I have 2 record labels waiting for my EP, and I'm waiting for a new g5 and some inspiration.

Have you maxed your RAM? Mac OS X is RAM hungry. Once you give it the RAM it needs the processing power is only a secondary concern.

Mr. MacPhisto
Apr 20, 2004, 11:03 AM
I'm not too sure it's the G5 that's causing the heat problems. My guess is it's the system controller. It is the major source of heat in the PowerMacs. Apple is going to have to design a controller that will not be overly hot or draw too much power for the PBs. That's where the challenge lies. The 970FX is notebook ready, but Apple needs to design a MoBo and controller that will not overheat or require too much cooling.


Are you sure about the G5 heat dissipation, especially the newer PowerPC 970FX? My understanding is that the G5 isn't a whole lot hotter than the G4. The huge heatsink and fans in the G5 PowerMac are designed that way to allow near-silent cooling of the entire system, rather than to cope with a furnace-like heat output from the G5. The G5 certainly runs much cooler than some of the Pentium 4 chips currently used in shipping x86 notebooks.

According to an article on the PowerPC 970 from arstechnica (link below), the original 0.13um 1.8GHz G5 CPU produces 42 watts...compared to the 2.8GHz Pentium 4 which produces 68.4 watts, and the 1GHz G4e which produces 30 watts. So you're looking at less than a 50% increase in heat output for an 80% increase in core frequency. It also mentions that at 1.2GHz, the first-gen PowerPC 970 produces only 19W...11W less than a G4e running at a 200MHz slower clock speed. The newer 0.09um 970FX G5s will be cooler than this, but as was highlighted in the recent Apple financial results conference call, is being held up because of manufacturing delays at IBM.

I should just clarify this...I'm not saying that heat issues with the G5 probably aren't going to be a major factor in the redesign of the PowerBook G5...I'm just saying that from what I've read, it doesn't seem that the G5 chip actually is 'the mini furnace' that many people claim. It's actually quite a bit cooler than CPUs already being used in common x86 notebooks. It shouldn't be an insurmountable issue for Apple...and I think 'G5 heat issues' are a red herring in a lot of product discussions around here too. As I mentioned before, it seems that PowerMac G5 updates are more likely delayed because of chip shortages from IBM, rather than the oft-repeated reason in these forums of "Apple can't keep the faster G5s cool!!!! OMFG!!!! HOT HOT HOT!!!!"

Does anyone have more up-to-date heat dissipation figures for the PowerPC 970 and the new PowerPC 970FX?

http://www.arstechnica.com/cpu/02q2/ppc970/ppc970-1.html

SiliconAddict
Apr 20, 2004, 11:07 AM
Yes, people do complain about battery life and heat issues. Have you held one of the PC laptops? They blow hot air out side vents like hot exhaust out of the rear of a Ferrari. Plus battery life is nil at those high speeds. And have you noticed how thick the cases are? Between 1.5 and 1.7 inches, not nice and thin like the Macs. The Centrinos do get better battery life and are thinner, but the clock and bus speeds are much lower too, more in line with the Macs.

The bus speed I quoted is a fast as is practical keeping in balance speed of the cpu and battery and heat issues.

Bull. We have 1.7Ghz IBM Pentium M laptops here in the office I work at that are 1" thick with a 400Mhz FSB. This thing runs DAMN cool. Does the fan turn on from time to time? Sure. In fact right now I'm doing a stress test on a laptop before I deploy it to the user. The fan is on but short of sticking ear 3" from the vent I can't hear it and the heat? Maybe 90*-95*, if that, coming out of the vent. Frankly I'm NOT impressed by Apple *books that have fans that almost NEVER turn on. A couple friends of mine have iBooks and the base of these things get bloody hot. Enough that I'm concerned for the long term reliability of these systems. (e.g. super hot systems = better chance of hardware failure.) Oh and as for battery life on that laptop I speced out above the system get aprox 4-5 hours depending on what you are doing with the system.

gskiser
Apr 20, 2004, 11:10 AM
Quick comparison:

Xserve G5 (up to dual proc.)-1.73 inches (4.4 cm) high by 17.6 inches (44.7 cm) wide by 28 inches (71.1 cm) deep = 852.54 in^3 @ 33-37 lbs

PB17- Height: 1.0 inch (2.6 cm) by Width: 15.4 inches (39.2 cm) by Depth: 10.2 inches (25.9 cm) = 157.08 in^3 @ 6.9 lbs

PB12 - Height: 1.18 inches (3.0 cm) by Width: 10.9 inches (27.7 cm) by Depth: 8.6 inches (21.9 cm) = 110.61 in^3 @ 4.6 lbs

the overall volume of the Xserve is about 5.4 times bigger than the PB17 and 7.7 times bigger than the PB12. Remember that the internal volume of the PBs are greatly reduced due to the screen and keyboard which do not have analogous components in the Xserve (whereas you could say the HD, DVD drives, etc, are analogous between the two).

That Apple can get two G5s into something at least 5.4 times larger, does not mean that they can put it into a PB at the moment. However, the low 970fx yields could be creating a ripple effect across the pro lines, pushing back PM and PB updates.

I disagree. The reason the Xserve is 5 times bigger is not just because of the G5. Its a server for goodness sakes. One could equally argue that its got 10 times more than we'd even want in a laptop. I don't need dual 2.0ghz G5's in a laptop. I'd take a single G5 running at 1.5ghz. The single processor this lower speed wouldn't warrent as much power and cooling as is required in the Xserve. Another example, I don't need 8gb of RAM. I'd be happy with 2gb to start out with in PBG5. The 970fx is not the reason that the Xserve is 5x larger. After seing it put into a only 1.73" high Xserve plus, knowing what we know about the 970fx's heat and power consumption when its clocked back, its not unreasonable to wonder why Apple cannot get it into a laptop.

I do however completely agree with your theory that the low 970fx yields are having a ripple effect on PM as well as PB. I see apple's PBG4 update yesterday simply as a filler to buy a little time. It took no effort, simply use the same enclosure and pop in a pin-for-pin 1.5G4, throw in a 4x Superdrive, and call it new. Hardly anything to get excited about. I do think the 970fx delay forced them to do this though. I don't think however they did it because of logistical issues in getting the 970fx into a PB. I think this has been a huge priority for them since the release of the 970fx. I wouldn't be surprised if they have a working prototype but are waiting for the 970fx production to ramp up. Obviously, the PMG5 gets first dibs on the 970fx's once production is in full force, I think we'll see PBG5s sooner than some think. I predict we'll see PBG5's either WWDC or the Paris Expo. Apple knows the G4 is an embarrassment in their professional line, and if the 970fx's become plentiful, I don't see a huge logistical reason why the cannot be used in a PBG5 if they're scaled back to 1.5 or 1.6. I just cannot see Apple getting 9 more months use out of these 1.5ghz G4, especially if the PMG5 does it 2.6-3ghz this summer as anticipated.

SiliconAddict
Apr 20, 2004, 11:13 AM
I'm not too sure it's the G5 that's causing the heat problems. My guess is it's the system controller. It is the major source of heat in the PowerMacs.

The system controller and FSB is 1Ghz. Of course its going to throw off a crap load of heat. Drop that sucker down to 400Mhz and I can guarantee you it will run a heck of a lot cooler. The question is HOW COOL and only Apple engineers can determine that.

sharky2313
Apr 20, 2004, 11:18 AM
Apple has to release a g5 powerbook this year and they will. Apple makes way too much money on the portable solutions. As their own numbers reveal many switchers actually by laptops not desktops.

I predicate that Apple will release a g5 powerbook by the Fall 2004 and quickly kick up the ibook to the powerbook speed levels. Then all will rejoice in Apple land. I would never, never purchase this upgrade. People need to vote with their pocketbooks. If no one purchases the pressure will be on.

gskiser
Apr 20, 2004, 11:20 AM
I also appreciate the fact that many Mac users, (thanks to the longevity of Macs), only have to upgrade their systems every 3-5 years in some cases. As a result, they would like the most “bang for their buck” so to speak, and although they may not need a G5, it would be nice to have one for longevity’s sake. This is completely understandable as well.


I completely agree. I dont want a PBG5 for 'bragging rights' or for the raw processing speed. I want it because it will last for 5 years. The G4 will not. While apple may 'support' the G4 for several years to some capacity, it's not going to be able to utilize a lot of the features that Apple will introduce down the road long term. I don't see why people don't see the big picture. This transition is even more critical than it was with the G3 to G4 transition. With 64-bit being the future for Apple, the 64-bit G5 is completely different in terms of longevity, than the 32-bit G4. While we don't need the power, we want the ability to have a processor we can grow into (instead of grow out of) in the next year or two when 64-bit OS and applications becomes a reality.

andiwm2003
Apr 20, 2004, 11:22 AM
how much faster is a single 1.6 G5 over the 1.5 PB?

how much for a photoshop filter?
how much for rotating an image in photoshop?
how much to scroll a powerpoint presentation (many pics)?
how much for recalculating a soundfile?

my guess it's 10%-20%. so as a nonprofessional user would you notice the difference?
has anybody some experience with a 1.6 G5 and a 1.25 PB (since the 1.5 isn't out long enough)?

andi

Bhennies
Apr 20, 2004, 11:22 AM
Have you maxed your RAM? Mac OS X is RAM hungry. Once you give it the RAM it needs the processing power is only a secondary concern.RAM won't help me all that much in this situation. It's the CPU that runs out of steam. Pro Tools is a very cache and processor hungry program. Thanks anyway... :)

TyleRomeo
Apr 20, 2004, 11:27 AM
Here comes the nuclear laptop...
No, absolutely freaking no way. The G4's are hot as they are, cramming two into a PowerBook is impossible. Have you seen the heat sinks in the last Dual G4 tower revision? You would not want to have a notebook 20cm thick now, would you?

The future is G5 (single).

so then the next powerbook has to be a G5. And we may have to wait another year for it then. is that what you're saying, or do you think there will be another g4 upgrade. besides the 7447 run much cooler than the 7455 chips in the towers.

Tyler

Lancetx
Apr 20, 2004, 11:34 AM
For those that say Apple hasn't been keeping up speed wise with their notebooks, I found this comparison rather interesting. This compares the speed of the PowerBook models on 9/1/03 to those available today, a span of only about 7 1/2 months.

12" PowerBook - 9/1/03: 867 MHz Today: 1.33 GHz (+53.4%)
15" PowerBook - 9/1/03: 867 MHz Today: 1.33 GHz (+53.4%)
15" PowerBook - 9/1/03: 1 GHz Today: 1.5 GHz (+50%)
17" PowerBook - 9/1/03: 1 GHz Today: 1.5 GHz (+50%)

Seeing as how each model has had an increase of at least 50% in less than 8 months time, I really don't see what all of the complaining is about.

otter-boy
Apr 20, 2004, 11:39 AM
I disagree. The reason the Xserve is 5 times bigger is not just because of the G5. Its a server for goodness sakes. One could equally argue that its got 10 times more than we'd even want in a laptop. I don't need dual 2.0ghz G5's in a laptop. I'd take a single G5 running at 1.5ghz. The single processor this lower speed wouldn't warrent as much power and cooling as is required in the Xserve. Another example, I don't need 8gb of RAM. I'd be happy with 2gb to start out with in PBG5. The 970fx is not the reason that the Xserve is 5x larger. After seing it put into a only 1.73" high Xserve plus, knowing what we know about the 970fx's heat and power consumption when its clocked back, its not unreasonable to wonder why Apple cannot get it into a laptop.


Granted, it is a server and has a few things the PB does not: more memory, AC power converter, etc. What I was talking about is the physical space needed to dissipate heat: more air volume equals better ability to move heat away from the mobo and processor. If the dual 2 GHz G5 is 10x what you would need in a PB, you already have much more than you need in a 1.5 GHz G4 PB. You state that 1.73" isn't that big; compared to the width of a PM, you are right, but compared to the actual interior height of a PB, you could argue the exact opposite, that it is very large by comparison. The internal height of a PB17 (external height minus screen minus keyboard (maybe minus battery)) is most likely under half the height of an Xserve . That reduced height would significantly hamper air-flow. Unless they find another way to move heat away from the processor and mobo, it will be a hot laptop.

Anyway, as others have noted, the G5 is not significantly faster than the G4 at similar clock speeds, but it does scale much higher and is more ready for the computing needs of the future. It will be in the PB soon, but it is not nearly as simple as G5 Xserve = G5 PB.

gskiser
Apr 20, 2004, 11:45 AM
Granted, it is a server and has a few things the PB does not: more memory, AC power converter, etc. What I was talking about is the physical space needed to dissipate heat: more air volume equals better ability to move heat away from the mobo and processor. If the dual 2 GHz G5 is 10x what you would need in a PB, you already have much more than you need in a 1.5 GHz G4. You state that 1.73" isn't that big; compared to the width of a PM, you are right, but compared to the actual interior height of a PB, you could argue the exact opposite, that it is very large by comparison. The internal height of a PB17 (external height minus screen minus keyboard (maybe minus battery)) is most likely under half the height of an Xserve . That reduced height would significantly hamper air-flow. Unless they find another way to move heat away from the processor and mobo, it will be a hot laptop.

Anyway, as others have noted, the G5 is not significantly faster than the G4 at similar clock speeds, but it does scale much higher and is more ready for the computing needs of the future. It will be in the PB soon, but it is not nearly as simple as G5 Xserve = G5 PB.

Points noted, and I do understand and agree with you that its not nearly as simple as the Xserve. However, I do think it possible. Apple engineers continually suprise us. As I mentioned before, and I agree with you, it is more ready for the computing needs of the future than the G4...which is what I'm mainly concerned with.

otter-boy
Apr 20, 2004, 12:05 PM
Apple engineers continually suprise us. As I mentioned before, and I agree with you, it is more ready for the computing needs of the future than the G4...which is what I'm mainly concerned with.

To log my vote: I am waiting until the PB goes G5 before buying one (switching back to Apple from PC, which my wife has already done). I am looking at owning my next computer as long as I've owned this one (4+ years). I can wait a little bit longer because I mostly write (fiction) on mine and surf the web. I would like to do some web design and look forward to using Photoshop on the G5. I will also be glad to be able to work on a laptop without having it plugged in (my battery has lasted this long but is not good for extended unplugged use).

I do think that the G5 will make it into the PB within the next year (especially considering that IBM is already working hard on its G5 successor, which is said to be even more mobile-ready than the 970). After the 970fx production constraints come down, we'll really see what the chip is capable of.

As long as I'm not making a living off of my laptop (and barely making a living anyway), I can't justify buying a 32-bit computer when a 64-bit computer is just around the corner.

I'm looking forward to seeing what the PBG5 will look like and how it performs.
Although that PB 1.5GHz 15-inch with superdrive and ATi 9700 with 128MB RAM graphics board looks awfully tempting.

iPC
Apr 20, 2004, 12:09 PM
If you take a comparable Pc laptop processor say the Pentium Mobile, they max out at 1.7Ghz. So the 1.5Ghz G4 certianly isn't slow. Not as fast a Dual 2.0Ghz G5, but not slow either.

Also, the Radeon 9700 graphics is really top notch. You certianly can't complain about the video card! Dell doesn't have anything above a Radeon 9600 for their notebooks.
NVIDIA® Quadro FX Go1000

Found in the Dell Precision Mobile Workstation M60.

SiliconAddict
Apr 20, 2004, 12:21 PM
Seeing as how each model has had an increase of at least 50% in less than 8 months time, I really don't see what all of the complaining is about.

You NEED to understand. The CPU's speed may have increased but the overall system speed still is drastically lacking. It's like having not only a automatic in a Porsche, ick, but going out and finding the world's crappiest automatic transmission and tossing it into that Porsche. The overall performance of the car is neutered. Apple has a beautifully crafted, well equipped, feature rich, slow POS on their hands. 50% speed increase is relative when the likely outcome for that performance increase may be negligible. As someone else posted I'm going to be VERY interested in seeing what benchmark results barefeats.com comes out with in comparison to 1Ghz, or 1.33Ghz systems. I'm betting the performance is going to be negligible simply because the system bus is being strangled. As I, and a few others, have commented in several other threads this is the EXACT same predicament the G4 PowerMac was in pre-G5.

Wash!!
Apr 20, 2004, 12:32 PM
I you are such engineering geniuses and electronic wizards and can bend and break the laws of physics. make your mark send Apple your designs or better yet get a job with them and teach them a thing or two. :rolleyes:

SiliconAddict
Apr 20, 2004, 12:39 PM
What Pentium M can kick these numbers?

http://forgetcomputers.com/~jdroz/pages/09.html

The Pentium is nowhere close to the G4s. The problem is programs which aren't optimized for the G4. Thank goodness Apple released Motion. It will make Adobe wish they had optimized Premier sooner.

Give me a break. You can NOT compare performance by pure chip specs. Are those number from desktops or laptops. Big freaking diff in RAM speed, FSB speed, hard drive speed, etc, etc. The Pentium M is strictly a laptop CPU and as I stated before:

http://www.barefeats.com/image04/al15-pc2.gif

That is real world benchmarks handled by a Mac advo site. The fact of the matter is the G4 is being strangled by its system bus. You can throw any type of spec you want at me because at the end of that day under the right circumstances I could probably setup a test platform that proves undeniably that a 200Mhz Pentium Pro kicks the crap out of a 3Ghz Pentium 4. Tests can and are rigged all the time. But barefeats.com is a ligit site and screeching about optimizations isn't going to change the fact that the G4 PowerBook is being soundly trounced by its PC Pentium M counterpart.

PS- hehe. Had to laugh at your optimization comments. The CPU Motion is optimized for is the G5. No mention of the G4 anywhere on www.apple.com/motion 's site.
Motion is fine-tuned to maximize the hardware and architecture of the Power Mac G5 and Mac OS X Panther. The result? Real-time on-screen responsiveness and interactivity that feels like a dedicated system. Move and resize video layers interactively, add filters at full resolution and watch keyframe and behavior animations come to life instantly. If you’re using Motion’s advanced particle generator, you can adjust the angle, color and rate in real-time while the effect is playing.

Zaty
Apr 20, 2004, 12:43 PM
For those that say Apple hasn't been keeping up speed wise with their notebooks, I found this comparison rather interesting. This compares the speed of the PowerBook models on 9/1/03 to those available today, a span of only about 7 1/2 months.

12" PowerBook - 9/1/03: 867 MHz Today: 1.33 GHz (+53.4%)
15" PowerBook - 9/1/03: 867 MHz Today: 1.33 GHz (+53.4%)
15" PowerBook - 9/1/03: 1 GHz Today: 1.5 GHz (+50%)
17" PowerBook - 9/1/03: 1 GHz Today: 1.5 GHz (+50%)

Seeing as how each model has had an increase of at least 50% in less than 8 months time, I really don't see what all of the complaining is about.

Well, the thing is that the 12" and the 17" were announced in Jan 03, the 15" even back in Nov 02" So the span you mention is in fact 15 1/2 months for the 12" and the 17" and 17 1/2 months for the 15". But still, that's not a bad progress.

adamjay
Apr 20, 2004, 01:17 PM
Well, the thing is that the 12" and the 17" were announced in Jan 03, the 15" even back in Nov 02" So the span you mention is in fact 15 1/2 months for the 12" and the 17" and 17 1/2 months for the 15". But still, that's not a bad progress.

no kidding... every single one of those mentioned powerbooks got updated later in the month of September '03... nice way to Doctor the point.

if and when the G5 PB's come out, they MUST have 1MB L2 and at least 266mhz FSB's... otherwise, its pointless and outside of any new case design they will be essentially a speedbump to the current G4's. and if those kind of spec's aren't seen in the first PB G5's, i'll probably be picking up a discontinued or refurb current G4. Waves Linear Multiband plugin decided to be a real processor pig today for some reason... so i will definitely need to upgrade by the end of the year.

Snowy_River
Apr 20, 2004, 01:31 PM
For those that say Apple hasn't been keeping up speed wise with their notebooks, I found this comparison rather interesting. This compares the speed of the PowerBook models on 9/1/03 to those available today, a span of only about 7 1/2 months.

12" PowerBook - 9/1/03: 867 MHz Today: 1.33 GHz (+53.4%)
15" PowerBook - 9/1/03: 867 MHz Today: 1.33 GHz (+53.4%)
15" PowerBook - 9/1/03: 1 GHz Today: 1.5 GHz (+50%)
17" PowerBook - 9/1/03: 1 GHz Today: 1.5 GHz (+50%)

Seeing as how each model has had an increase of at least 50% in less than 8 months time, I really don't see what all of the complaining is about.

Whoops! Quoting the wrong specs!

Here's the proper numbers:

12" PowerBook - 9/1/03: 1 GHz Today: 1.33 GHz (+33%)
15" PowerBook - 9/1/03: 1 GHz Today: 1.33 GHz (+33%)
15" PowerBook - 9/1/03: 1.25 GHz Today: 1.5 GHz (+20%)
17" PowerBook - 9/1/03: 1.25 GHz Today: 1.5 GHz (+20%)

Not quite as dramatic as you'd indicated.

Snowy_River
Apr 20, 2004, 01:31 PM
I quite fancy the idea of a portable desktop for the purpose you mention. By this i mean the un-compromised power of the desktop combined with a piggyback clamshell screen and keyboard. An altogether better thought out portability with built in tough-box qualities would seem a nice little niche product for the traveling creative with a car. Space for a module in the keyboard (jog shuttle, or a master fader) would be nice too. :)

Fitzcaraldo

Ah, the DeskBook... Perhaps it will come, yet...

Snowy_River
Apr 20, 2004, 01:37 PM
... By the time they get all these issues worked out IBM will likely be on the next generation 64 bit chip, the 60 micron process (they're working on it parallel with the 970 FX) and that would be my guess for what you will see in a laptop.

The next size process is in development for support chips right now. It will be a while yet before you see it implemented in CPU class chips. (How long did it take before a CPU class chip was produced at 90nm?) If Apple were to wait for a 65nm chip to put into the next PB, we likely wouldn't see it for a couple of years. I, for one, doubt we'll have to wait that long before we see the PB with something other than a G4...

Snowy_River
Apr 20, 2004, 01:39 PM
I'm not too sure it's the G5 that's causing the heat problems. My guess is it's the system controller. It is the major source of heat in the PowerMacs. Apple is going to have to design a controller that will not be overly hot or draw too much power for the PBs. That's where the challenge lies. The 970FX is notebook ready, but Apple needs to design a MoBo and controller that will not overheat or require too much cooling.

Ah, it's so nice to see someone who's actually educated on these boards! I get so tired of hearing either 'the 970FX is still too hot' or 'they can get them into the xServe, so they must be cool enough to get into the PowerBook'.

Here's to knowing a little about what you're talking about! Cheers, mate!

minstryoffunk
Apr 20, 2004, 01:43 PM
If that's the case screw apple. I'm not waiting over a year for a high performance Apple laptop. And don't tell me the current 1.5Ghz laptop is high performance. Apple users are falling into the Mhz myth. Reality time. PC laptops outperform Apple's *books. I'll get an IBM. :mad: Here's a realization Apple better get in a freaking hurry. If they are going to charge a premium for their laptops they DAMN well better have performance to go with it and if not they better change their price scheme accordingly.
This is NOT cool.

Reality Time part deux: go to store.apple.com and configure the updated 14" iBook. now go to www.dell.com and configure the inspiron 600m (easily the most popular computer here at BU). if you make it so that the specs are as close as possible and add equal warranty coverage, the iBook ($1800) ends up cheaper than the Dell ($1900). Factor in better quality, much improved aesthetics, and a longer usable life, and the iBook is a much better buy. The only area that the dell outspecs the apple is a slightly faster CPU and a trackpad that I like better.

Speaking of which, not to flog a dead horse, since I have a G4 tower and the weather was really nice yesterday, I borrowed my girlfriends 600m to do some work in the Public Gahden. Its a fine machine when plugged in, but the screen is far too dim when running on the battery. Since the girlfriend doesn't much like when I change things on her computer, I merely tried to adjust the brightness from the control panel. It wouldn't let me. I spent a good 1/4th of my time trying to find the cursor, which was too dark to see. This plus hardly being able to read what I was typing made me wish I had gone for convenience over power to begin with and gotten a TiBook to begin with. At least I got her to switch to iTunes so I could listen to my purchased music on her comp.


In closing, the monday updates, while overdue, are really quite nice and the extra features (standard airport, better radeon, etc) go a long way towards making the p/ibook competetive.



oh yeah…forgot to mention that we're both sick of dealing with XP security problems

wizard
Apr 20, 2004, 01:48 PM
Come on your better than that. Everyone is aware of IBM's issues with the production of the 970FX for the XServe. If they are having trouble with low volumn machinery like XServe, it is pretty clear that you won't be putting the hardware into high volumn product until the issues have been resolved and you are confident in that resolution.

So number one issue is that the chip is not ready for prime time. In the case of the current portables release, Apple had no choice but to use the G4.

As to long term issues; the FX is power humgery and will have to run at a reasonably fast clock to better the current G4 machines. So your talking about 2GHz 970FX in a portable. This is a power hungery beast especially if you maintian the high bandwidth circuitry that supports the 970. Contrary to what a lot of people think that 970 series is not an awsome computational engine, much of its advantage comes from the high speed interface. Currently Apple does not have a low power solution to the issue of high bandwidth support chips.

On top of all of that Apple needs to maintain a slim profile or better yet a slimmer profile in its hardware. The removal of heat from all of ths fast components that make up a G5 would become a problem. slow your componnents cown to more energy efficent hardware and you decrease bandwidth thus strangling the G5 putting yourself back into the same position as you are with the G4.

I suspect that before we see 64 bit in a Apple portable we will see new technology to faclitate its implementation. Thus a G5 based iMac or its replacement will hit the market before a portable will. Such a machine should have addressed the outstanding issues with the 970 and power usage. I would not be surprised though if Apple just takes its time and waits for a completely differrent chip to plug into the portable.

Thanks
dave


Very apparent? How so? Based on what? It's not a very hot chip. It may be a little hotter than the G4, but it's cooler than chips that are used in PC laptops. Yes, there are other issues, but they have less to do with the 970FX and more to do with other aspects of the system design. So, tell me again, how is the 970FX not able to fit in a portable environment?

dogfood
Apr 20, 2004, 02:03 PM
Why is everyone dying over a new G5. They are hot and even with the die shrink require a lot of power. After all, it is a desktop/server chip. It will never compete with the likes of the Pentium M in terms of power consumption.

What I want to know is where is IBM's new Altivec G3 (i.e. the 750 vx) The thing was supposed to have a 400 MHz FSB and scale well past 2.0 GHz. With all of IBMs great FAB technology and the fact that it is basically an improved G4 it should have a high IPC and good thermals. Just what a laptop needs.

Yet I haven't heard any news on it since Dec 03.

wizard
Apr 20, 2004, 02:12 PM
While your correct numbers do reflect reality on the Mac side of things, it is the competition that Apple has nto kept up with. Intels centrino line has had a significnat impact on the portable world. This is where they are not keeping up.

At some point in time the performance differrential will become so great that MacOS/X will not be enough to keep attracting customers. Contrary to popular belief on these boards there are people who expect perfromance from their portables. The higher end of the PowerBook got a nice rev with repect to the old equipment but this not saying much.

The point is if you bench mark agianst yourself you can always make yourself look good. What you don't want to do is loose perspective with the rest of the world. Apple really needs to be able to deliver better performance than what it has. The unfortunate reality is that they can't at this moment in time.

Maybe in a few months they will have a 970 set that passes the mustard so to speak. I would not be surprised to see Apple try to bridge to something differrent though. There has been rumors to the effect that Apple and IBM are working on a laptop specific 64 bit processor, if this rumor is true we may have to wiat for this chip before we will see substantially faster portables form Apple. It could very well be that the comments from Apple about a long wait for the 970 based laptops, could be an indication that long time = infinity.

In other words Apple may be saying that all of us will have turned to dust before a 970 based portable comes out. Now those clamoring for a 970 based laptop might not relish the idea that they will be blowing in the wind before that laptop comes out, but if that thought causes them to change expectations a bit then it is not such a bad thing.

Dave



Whoops! Quoting the wrong specs!

Here's the proper numbers:

12" PowerBook - 9/1/03: 1 GHz Today: 1.33 GHz (+33%)
15" PowerBook - 9/1/03: 1 GHz Today: 1.33 GHz (+33%)
15" PowerBook - 9/1/03: 1.25 GHz Today: 1.5 GHz (+20%)
17" PowerBook - 9/1/03: 1.25 GHz Today: 1.5 GHz (+20%)

Not quite as dramatic as you'd indicated.

aavatsma
Apr 20, 2004, 02:12 PM
First of all, there are many people, pro users included, on this forum who have already said that a G5 isn’t required right now for their work, which is what I was getting at with my initial post. I do appreciate what you would like to do though with your PowerBook, and please note that I did say there are always exceptions – there ARE people out there who could make good use of a G5 PowerBook for what they do. I just think that for lots of people it's either bragging rights, or a dillusion of "since the G5 is the new chip, I have to have it since it's the best and I NEED it".

(in reply to another post)
This is what I’ve been saying – of course there are the exceptions out there who would love a G5 PowerBooks, but even pro users, like yourself are saying they don’t absolutely need one. Now would it be NICE to have, sure, but that’s not what we’re talking about here...

No no no. We are not exeptions. Everyone who needs a powerbook, also needs a faster computer.
Apple has two lines of notebooks, one for regular users and one for power-users. Everyone who works with music, movies, 3d and layout (and others too I am sure) wants a fast computer. And if they want apple and osX, they go for the powerbook. Just because you dont need a faster computer, dont assume everyone else doesnt. There is a reason apple has two different lines of notebooks.




I totally see where you’re coming from – and that ambitious attitude is the kind that pushes Apple’s R&D environment – never settling for what we have, and always striving to improve things, until we can do amazing, supercomputer-like tasks with ease. :cool: However, the flipside of that is, you have to be realistic - otherwise with that kind of attitude, you’re going to be one of those people that is never satisfied. You never want to wait for a task to be complete? So until you can take the entire batch of pre-rendered files of Finding Nemo and render the whole movie in 1 second, a computer won’t be fast enough? Will a computer ever be fast enough then, until the Apple G57 is released in a hundred years or so, which can read your thoughts through its psychic input system? ;)

As I said before; I am a satisfied powerbook user. Sure I want more speed when I work on my projects, but the look and interface of my pbook still made me choose this one over a pc. But, is it unrealistic to want a apple laptop that is as fast as pc-laptops? I think not.

Both the users and apple needs faster high-end laptops as fast as possible. Dont let your own needs blind you from this fact.

SiliconAddict
Apr 20, 2004, 02:13 PM
Reality Time part deux: go to store.apple.com and configure the updated 14" iBook. now go to www.dell.com and configure the inspiron 600m (easily the most popular computer here at BU). if you make it so that the specs are as close as possible and add equal warranty coverage, the iBook ($1800) ends up cheaper than the Dell ($1900). Factor in better quality, much improved aesthetics, and a longer usable life, and the iBook is a much better buy. The only area that the dell outspecs the apple is a slightly faster CPU and a trackpad that I like better.



Well first off I wouldn't touch an iBook even if you gave me one. Too many people I know have had "issues" with their iBooks. One to the point of swearing off Apple altogether after the 3 times he got his system board replaced. Long story there. :rolleyes: It would be PowerBook or bust.

Try confing an IBM sometime. I wouldn't touch a Dell laptop with a 10 meter cattle prod. Their desktops are OK, but Dell's laptops blow with hurricane force winds. IBM laptops on the other hand are tasty. They, IMHO, look sweet with their black finish, are well constructed, and built like a tank. (The R series has a freaking motion sensor to lock the hard drive in the event you drop your system.)
But again I'm not talking about features. This is where Apple is trying to get your attention. Away from the system speed and pay more attention to the features they add. Forget that our systems are slow. Look we have a backlite keyboard, BlueTooth, DVD burners, 802.11G!! 1" thick. All good things but without some serious horsepower under the hood I couldn't care less about those "features" or the how sexy the shell is. But that's me.

wizard
Apr 20, 2004, 02:18 PM
I'm thinking that Apple and IBM punted on this one. I suspect that design efforts are going into a 64 bit version.

Now I could be wrong as the informaiton relating to this is thin at best.

The other possibility is that Apple and IBM want to bring out AltVec2 with this chip at the smae time that they bring out a 64 bit chip with Altvec2 (VMX2)

Another possibility is that Motorola got its act together enough to satisfy Apple.

Thanks
Dave



Why is everyone dying over a new G5. They are hot and even with the die shrink require a lot of power. After all, it is a desktop/server chip. It will never compete with the likes of the Pentium M in terms of power consumption.

What I want to know is where is IBM's new Altivec G3 (i.e. the 750 vx) The thing was supposed to have a 400 MHz FSB and scale well past 2.0 GHz. With all of IBMs great FAB technology and the fact that it is basically an improved G4 it should have a high IPC and good thermals. Just what a laptop needs.

Yet I haven't heard any news on it since Dec 03.

matznentosh
Apr 20, 2004, 02:29 PM
By the time they get all these issues worked out IBM will likely be on the next generation 64 bit chip, the 60 micron process (they're working on it parallel with the 970 FX) and that would be my guess for what you will see in a laptop.

From what I know, 60 micron chips are still more or less in the imagination stage. IBM and Intel are not churning out these 90 micron chips easily yet. If we're going to wait for a 60 micron chip for a G5 Powerbook, I think we're going to have a long wait.

Making newer and faster chips is not something that happens automatically or easily. If it was we wouldn't have to wait for what we want at all. People have to try things, fail, try again till a new chip is right.

Spazmodius
Apr 20, 2004, 02:43 PM
Why is everyone dying over a new G5. They are hot and even with the die shrink require a lot of power. After all, it is a desktop/server chip. It will never compete with the likes of the Pentium M in terms of power consumption.

What I want to know is where is IBM's new Altivec G3 (i.e. the 750 vx) The thing was supposed to have a 400 MHz FSB and scale well past 2.0 GHz. With all of IBMs great FAB technology and the fact that it is basically an improved G4 it should have a high IPC and good thermals. Just what a laptop needs.

Yet I haven't heard any news on it since Dec 03.

I have precisely the same question. Upon airing a similar question in this forum, I was called an idiot and roundly lambasted for jabbering about "vaporware". I must admit, perusal of IBM's literature and the PPC Roadmap makes no mention of the 750vx. If it exists, all parties are keeping a pretty tight lid on it. I can only speculate. Here are my idiot ravings in the subject. Feel free, any and all, to pile on and remind me of what I brainless fool I am.

Apple certainly could use something like the 750vx, which supposedly has the 970's vector unit, runs faster, cooler, and has a higher-clocked FSB than the Moto 74xx-series chips. I see no good reason why, given Intel's chip offerings, that a 32-bit PPC chip built on the 750 core couldn't have those specs. It's not like it's phyically impossible. IBM now produces chips with a 1GHz FSB on a 130nm process, why would a 400MHz FSB be so hard to attain? Plus, with a 100MHz FSB, the 750FX/G3 is MAD cool and energy-efficient. My wife's iBook at 900MHz can get five hours on a single charge, if she turns the brightness down to about 2/3 max, with Airport on. I'm lucky to get 3 hours out of my Ti/667Mhz under the same conditions, with a brand-new battery. With a 1-year old battery, I got slightly less than two hours. Her battery is a year old, and shows no signs of decreased function. If it weren't for the lack of Altivec, her iBook would kick my Ti-books arse for all tasks, and does so handily for things like Office, which don't use Altivec. The G3 makes a good foundation for an energy-efficient mobile G4-type chip.

If there ISN'T a 750VX waiting in the wings, or something like it, why the hell not? The Moto G4 isn't a bad chip, but it's a seriously maxed-out architecture, it would seem. We have seen, over about a 1.5 year span, the most-advanced G4 variant increase from 1.4 GHz to 1.5GHz. Now, how bad does this break Moore's Law? Pretty freaking badly! Apple NEEDS to move on. NOW.

If, say, as the rumors suggest, the 750VX might be ready "end of 3rd quarter" (which I now guess must mean calendar year), why would Apple/IBM say so little about it? Well, for one, they never reveal anything until it's on the assembly line, but also, they want us to buy G4 portables. If I knew for sure a G5 Powerbook, or even better, a cheap and fast 750VX iBook was coming in less than a year, NO WAY would I shell out the cash now for the current offerings. Nor would you, I'm guessing.

My Ti-book is seriously showing its age, but it's still got legs. I'm holding out 'till X-mas or there abouts. I'm hoping something better is coming. If not...well, I don't know. I may have to consider a Stinkpad.

Snowy_River
Apr 20, 2004, 02:47 PM
Everyone is aware of IBM's issues with the production of the 970FX for the XServe. If they are having trouble with low volumn machinery like XServe, it is pretty clear that you won't be putting the hardware into high volumn product until the issues have been resolved and you are confident in that resolution.

So number one issue is that the chip is not ready for prime time. In the case of the current portables release, Apple had no choice but to use the G4.

Okay, I'm not disputing that Apple has issues to address before getting the G5 into a PB, thus, as you so aptly put it, Apple has no choice but to use the G4. However, what you're talking about above is a process issue, not a chip issue. The fact that IBM is having trouble producing these chips has nothing to do with whether or not these chips are ready and able to be put in PBs.

As to long term issues; the FX is power humgery and will have to run at a reasonably fast clock to better the current G4 machines. So your talking about 2GHz 970FX in a portable.

Well, I have to disagree. A 1.6GHz G5 would see a notable gain (very significant in some instances) over a 1.5GHz G4. Further, from the numbers that have been published, the 970FX is not that much more power hungry than a similarly clocked G4. So, if a 1.6GHz 970FX is too power hungry for a PB, then I'd stipulate that the 1.5GHz G4 is, too, and you'd better write to Apple right away to tell them to pull their new updates.

...Contrary to what a lot of people think that 970 series is not an awsome computational engine, much of its advantage comes from the high speed interface. Currently Apple does not have a low power solution to the issue of high bandwidth support chips...

While I'll agree with you that the bandwidth is a major advantage, and the need to develop a lower power support chipset is there, I have to disagree with your characterization of the 970 as not being an awesome computational machine. In one application, in particular, even after adjusting for clockspeed differences, the G5 sees anywhere from a 2.5x to a 6x speed gain over the G4. You simply cannot tell me that this is due to the memory bandwidth.

On top of all of that Apple needs to maintain a slim profile or better yet a slimmer profile in its hardware.

Why? Because you want it? Sure, I'd like to keep things slim and light, but for the power of the G5 I'd be more than willing to see some growth in thickness and weight. Again, I freely acknowledge that it would be a mistake for Apple to put out a 2.5" thick, 12 lbs. G5 PB. But, given the heat numbers that we have for the 970FX, I doubt such a size would be necessary. Perhaps 1.2"? Maybe +1 lb., or less?

The removal of heat from all of ths fast components that make up a G5 would become a problem. slow your componnents cown to more energy efficent hardware and you decrease bandwidth thus strangling the G5 putting yourself back into the same position as you are with the G4.

First, this again has nothing to do with whether the chip is ready to be placed in a mobile setting.

Second, the G4 is currently choked by its own hardware limitations. It can't have a faster FSB. On the other hand, it's not that hard to imagine putting a 970FX on a 400MHz or 500MHz FSB in a mobile setting. This would be drastically faster than the G4 is capable of, but slower than the PMs, and therefore producing less heat.

I suspect that before we see 64 bit in a Apple portable we will see new technology to faclitate its implementation.

Well, of course we will see new tech to facilitate its implementation. That's the most... never mind. I'm guessing what you mean is that we'll see a whole new CPU chip. But you've covered yourself by phrasing it this way, so even a new system controller for the 970FX would prove you right.

I would not be surprised though if Apple just takes its time and waits for a completely differrent chip to plug into the portable.

Well, if the problem is with the hot chipset elements that support the faster FSB, then those would be faced by a new chip, too. So, while Apple may be looking to have a derivative chip developed specifically for the mobile market (a la Pentium M), which may well be a very wise move for them, I'd guess that they're still aiming to get the current G5 (970FX) into a PowerBook, and probably by the next revision.

And, 'Come on your better than that' yourself. Sheesh...

Snowy_River
Apr 20, 2004, 02:56 PM
Why is everyone dying over a new G5. They are hot and even with the die shrink require a lot of power. After all, it is a desktop/server chip. It will never compete with the likes of the Pentium M in terms of power consumption.

What I want to know is where is IBM's new Altivec G3 (i.e. the 750 vx) The thing was supposed to have a 400 MHz FSB and scale well past 2.0 GHz. With all of IBMs great FAB technology and the fact that it is basically an improved G4 it should have a high IPC and good thermals. Just what a laptop needs.

Yet I haven't heard any news on it since Dec 03.

This is vaporware right now. To the best of my knowledge, it was never anything more than an unsubstantiated rumor, with no known 'good' source.

I'd think it was great if it came, but I'm not going to hold my breath for it...

minstryoffunk
Apr 20, 2004, 03:06 PM
just to add more idle speculation to the pot, anyone heard any updates on this project? http://lowendmac.com/practical/02/0401.html

wonder what the FSB on a 2ghz 040 is :D

Snowy_River
Apr 20, 2004, 03:08 PM
...Contrary to popular belief on these boards there are people who expect perfromance from their portables...

Well, yes, I happen to be one of them. This is why I want a G5 PB. I routinely run things on my computer that are in the category of Start the operation and go and have lunch. Sometimes it's even done by the time I get back. And, yes, I need to have portability. With a little luck, maybe I'll be able to afford to have two computers at some point, and then I'll have both my PB and a top-of-the-line G5 tower (dual 3.5GHz... drool...). Until then, though, I will continue to use what I have...


It could very well be that the comments from Apple about a long wait for the 970 based laptops, could be an indication that long time = infinity.

Unless the G5-M (ugh, what an awful name - how about G5-P, as in portable? No I still don't like it...) is nearing completion (i.e. will be ready for the next PB update), I think that this would be an incredibly foolish move on Apple's part. I, for one, have more faith in Apple than that...

JGowan
Apr 20, 2004, 04:04 PM
First, it's 'AL', not 'AI'. 'AL' as in aluminum, the material the case is made from.I know it stands for ALUMINUM, I'm not that dense. I was sick the day they taught the Periodic Table of Elements... so sue me.

Second, sit a couple of industrial designers down for a week and they'd come up with a half a dozen new design possibilities.
Spend another week doing focus group studies to determine which design has the greatest consumer appeal. Then send the designs to Steve Jobs for a week so he can decide which model he likes best, regardless of what the consumer focus groups say. Presto, in under a month you have a new design. It really doesn't take that much time. (This is, of course, grossly over-simplified, but I hope that you get my point...)GROSSLY is correct.If you think ANY of Apple's designs (especially since Job's return) have been created in less than a month, you're smoking too much Gandolph pipe weed.

Finally, I agree that Apple will most likely put the G5 in a new skin when it enters into the PowerBook arena.... thank you ...

However, I don't agree that Apple cares one bit how long the AL Book appearance has been around, or that that will have any influence on when they release the G5 PBs.Once again, I think you need to back off Old Toby, the finest weed in the South Farthing!

vannote
Apr 20, 2004, 04:21 PM
6. Turn off caps lock.

7. All a blade server is missing to operate on its own technically is a power supply and cooling.

8. Obviously and regardless of support structure needed, the point was IBM has shoehorned dual 970s into a blade form factor. If they can do that, Apple can get one into a PowerBook form factor.

9. Relax.

Ok, Relaxed... ;)

Please take a look at the BladeServer specifications. There is no way that the guts of a BladeServer will fit into a PowerBook form factor.

It also lacks it's own (as you mentioned) Power supply, Fans (Blowers actually), CD/DVD ROM, Plus it lacks nearly all external connectors (shared between the individual units). I am sure a BladeCenter moves much more air per server than a PowerBook does.

A BladeServer is 9.7" x 17.6" x 1.14", again, while missing the above components.

Cheers

evilgEEk
Apr 20, 2004, 04:51 PM
Ya know, the more I think about it the more I begin to convince myself that the G5 PB's will possibly make an appearance this year, or by MWSF '05. Maybe my desire for one is creating a false reality in my head. ;)

Apple has never ceased to amaze me. I remember last year before the 1ghz G4 TiBook w/superdrive was unveiled at MWSF '04 no one thought the superdrive would make it into a PB. It was definately a rumor but people on this very site said it wouldn't happen because of heat/size restraints..etc.. well, it happened and blew a lot of people away.

I really don't think there's just one group of engineers that works on everything..."okay, desktops are done, now on to the laptops!" ...heh heh..:) I'm sure Apple has been working on getting the G5 chip into a PB enclosure since they first put them in the desktop machines.

The market has changed dramatically and there are now PC laptops out there that truly rival Apple when it comes to speed. But I'm shopping for more than just processor speed, and the PB series blows away any PC laptop when talking about the whole package, in my opinion. And I'm a lifelong PC user too, unfortunately. ugh.. :p

It will happen, Apple won't let us down. And it will be absolutely beautiful when it does. If I haven't already broken down and bought a G4, I will definately buy a 1st gen. PB G5.

I still believe the G4's are great machines that are more than capable of meeting my needs of video/photo editing/rendering, 3D renders, gaming, surfing and anything else I decide to do for work or play. Sure the G5 machine (likely with increased FSB) would allow me to be more productive when working but the G4 still gets the job done.

Just have to sit back and wait.

:D

oingoboingo
Apr 20, 2004, 04:52 PM
no kidding... every single one of those mentioned powerbooks got updated later in the month of September '03... nice way to Doctor the point.

if and when the G5 PB's come out, they MUST have 1MB L2 and at least 266mhz FSB's... otherwise, its pointless and outside of any new case design they will be essentially a speedbump to the current G4's. and if those kind of spec's aren't seen in the first PB G5's, i'll probably be picking up a discontinued or refurb current G4. Waves Linear Multiband plugin decided to be a real processor pig today for some reason... so i will definitely need to upgrade by the end of the year.

G5 FSB speed is 50% of the core frequency, so even the slowest current shipping G5 (1.6GHz) has a FSB of 800MHz. So yes, your dream of having a FSB greater than 266MHz will probably be true.

mklos
Apr 20, 2004, 05:10 PM
If IBM can get two PowerPC 970s in a blade server, why can't Apple get one in a laptop!

(And those are really 1.6 GHz PowerPC 970s, and not POWER 4s. See here (http://www-132.ibm.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CategoryDisplay?categoryId=2586156&storeId=1&catalogId=-840&langId=-1))

Cooling a laptop is much harder than cooling a rack mount server, or a desktop. Do you realize how many little fans are on that Xserve? Also there are air ducts and heat sinks. Its very hard to cool the G5 without massive heat sinks on them. Its not as easy as just slap the G5 into the current PowerBook logicboard. Apple has to totally redesign it from the ground up with the new G5 System Architecture and then make it work well with a laptop. If everything was just that easy Apple probably would of released it by now. On average it takes about 1.5 to 2 years for Apple to do a major redesign of a any of their computers. The PowerMac G5 took roughly 2 years to design, the current iMacs took about 2 years to design, and so did the current PowerBooks.

I do agree with the FSB thing. If Apple/Motorola could get it up to say even 266 MHz as a start then they would be quite a bit faster. If Motorola would get off their @$$ and pick up on the R&D for the G4 then you would probably see more increases in speed.

I still think that Apple will introduce a G5 iMac late this year(if not at the WWDC) and I know thats going to piss people off, but Apple has to keep moving forward. In this industry you can't let things hold you back or you will get behind.

sethypoo
Apr 20, 2004, 05:15 PM
I've got a friend who believes my 867MHz G4 is comparable to a 2.4GHz P4. :) I'm not saying anything...

I'll say something: I've got a die-hard PC lover/computer science professor who swears that a 1.5 G4 is comparable to a 2.4 Ghz P4.

sethypoo
Apr 20, 2004, 05:21 PM
At least we know that one day the G5 will come to the PowerBook line. Heck, maybe a new line of laptops will be introduced.

I'd like to say that those who post here who say "screw OS X" because Apple is taking their time to design a killer laptop (the PB G5) need to get a serious reality check.

The G4 is a perfectly reasonable processor for the PowerBook and iBook lines. Want power? Get a G5 tower. Want power and portability, get a 1.5 Ghz 15" PowerBook G4. If that's not enough, learn patience.

Snowy_River
Apr 20, 2004, 05:50 PM
I know it stands for ALUMINUM, I'm not that dense. I was sick the day they taught the Periodic Table of Elements... so sue me.

I was simply offering a correction. No offense intended.

GROSSLY is correct.If you think ANY of Apple's designs (especially since Job's return) have been created in less than a month, you're smoking too much Gandolph pipe weed.

But you're missing my point. They've known that the G5 was in the works for a long time. Do you honestly think that they haven't been working on new designs for quite a while? My point was that it's not hard to come up with new designs. Even if we were to assume that they only started working on the next PB design when the G5 PMs began shipping, then they've still been working on it for seven months now. For that matter, even if they just started now, they'd have seven months to get them done and in production to be ready for the next update.

Once again, I think you need to back off Old Toby, the finest weed in the South Farthing!

Please refrain from throwing insults around. If you don't agree with me, fine. Frankly, I don't agree with you. I believe that if Apple could release a G5 PB in three months, the question of how long the current body-style of the PB has been on the market wouldn't enter into the equation. However, you're free to disagree with me.

dpwilliams
Apr 20, 2004, 06:07 PM
g4 has got to 1.5 so naturally they will now release the g5 as the next upgrade as they would not want to bring out a processor that is smaller than this and a 1.6 was the basic speed in the power mac range so it makes sense for them to bring the speed of the g4 up to 1.5 allowing the g5 to be 1.6 making it look better from a marketing point of view. :cool: cant wait

James L
Apr 20, 2004, 06:10 PM
Whoops! Quoting the wrong specs!

Here's the proper numbers:

12" PowerBook - 9/1/03: 1 GHz Today: 1.33 GHz (+33%)
15" PowerBook - 9/1/03: 1 GHz Today: 1.33 GHz (+33%)
15" PowerBook - 9/1/03: 1.25 GHz Today: 1.5 GHz (+20%)
17" PowerBook - 9/1/03: 1.25 GHz Today: 1.5 GHz (+20%)

Not quite as dramatic as you'd indicated.


Actually, I am pretty sure the 1st specs were correct, yours aren't.

On September 1st, 2003 the line up was:

Rev A 12": 867 MHZ
Last TiBook 15": 1GHZ
Rev A 17": 1GHZ


On September 16th, the lineup became:

Rev B 12": 1GHZ
Rev A 15": 1GHZ or 1.25GHZ
Rev B 17": 1.33 GHZ


..incidently, I don't think the 17" was ever at 1.25GHZ. It went from 1GHZ, to 1.33GHZ, to its current 1.5GHZ.

So, with regards to the 17", for example, it DID go from its original 1GHZ speed on Sept 1st 2003 to its current 1.5GHZ.

If I am wrong, I am sure someone will correct me!

MacFan25
Apr 20, 2004, 06:15 PM
The G4 is a perfectly reasonable processor for the PowerBook and iBook lines. Want power? Get a G5 tower. Want power and portability, get a 1.5 Ghz 15" PowerBook G4.
I agree that the G4 is a perfectly reasonable processor. It's just a shame that Apple has not been able to get the G5, which is much, much more than just a reasonable processor, into laptops sooner. We can only hope for the best. Though I'm sure that when Powerbook G5s do come out, they will be very impressive.

oingoboingo
Apr 20, 2004, 06:19 PM
The G4 is a perfectly reasonable processor for the PowerBook and iBook lines. Want power? Get a G5 tower. Want power and portability, get a 1.5 Ghz 15" PowerBook G4. If that's not enough, learn patience.

Actually I think in reality if it's not enough, then people will just buy a PC notebook. That's the danger for Apple. Outside a dedicated core of fanatic users, people aren't going to say "I need a really fast portable now, but Apple won't have the G5 PowerBook ready until next year. OK, no problem, I'll just sit on my hands and wait for Steve-o". There's no need for patience. Users will just switch...back to x86.

I do see where you're coming from...yes, a 1.5GHz G4 will offer many portable users all the power they need. Hell, my 1GHz 12" PowerBook does everything I need it to do with ease (except for games), because I *personally* only use my PowerBook for relatively light duty tasks. But as so many have pointed out, there are a not-insignificant number of portable users who will be able to suck up every last computing cycle available to them, and then need more. Apple gives us access to some of the best creative software on the market, and a lot of it is CPU-hungry. People want to be able to take their PowerBook into the studio, onto the set, out to their client's office...and run hungry applications like video editing and video effects rendering at desktop speeds. This isn't unreasonable. You can already buy full 64-bit AMD Athlon64 notebooks from x86 vendors, which while not being as slick in appearance as a PowerBook, are stilll highly portable, and which will leave a 1.5GHz G4 for dead.

Just saying "stop complaining, get a tower" isn't an answer. Users in the x86 aren't forced to make this desktop/notebook performance tradeoff to anywhere near the same degree as Mac users do. The G4 is a suitable chip for the iBook...it's a consumer line, and of course a G4 is often more than adequate for 'consumer-level' needs. But the PowerBook is pitched (and priced) as a professional-level machine. It's pitched at people who earn their living from their notebooks, not just people who like the look of aluminium over white plastic. There once was a time when 'PowerBook' meant a portable with nearly all the performance of a desktop. Now it doesn't, and that's what causes people to get hot under the collar on these forums. And what causes people to get even *hotter* under the collar is the suggestion that "they don't need" or "can't handle" the power of a G5 in a portable.

The Mac community would have to be the only tech community I've ever taken part in where its members seem to spend an equal amount of time telling each other they don't need any kind of improved technology, as they do discussing the technology itself.

pigwin32
Apr 20, 2004, 06:25 PM
Not contradicting myself; the power drain at 1.4 ghz is around 12 watts, which compares favorably to the G4 at 22 or 23 watts. However, when you crank it up to 1.8 ghz it jumps considerably, plus the heat really pumps up at that speed. Because of those issues, it's not practical for them to use the G5 at speeds faster than 1.4 to 1.6 at this time.
So Apple needs to get them puppies into the PB pronto, who's going to buy a 1.4GHz G5 when the PB G4 is at 1.5. I think we'll see maybe a 1.6GHz G5 debut in the PB sooner rather than later. Just enough to come in ahead speed-wise and the FSB will be throttled back to reduce heat issues.

wizard
Apr 20, 2004, 06:28 PM
Well, yes, I happen to be one of them. This is why I want a G5 PB. I routinely run things on my computer that are in the category of Start the operation and go and have lunch. Sometimes it's even done by the time I get back. And, yes, I need to have portability. With a little luck, maybe I'll be able to afford to have two computers at some point, and then I'll have both my PB and a top-of-the-line G5 tower (dual 3.5GHz... drool...). Until then, though, I will continue to use what I have...

Much the same here as far as using what I already have.

Frankly my issue with the new releases is that performance is important and Apple is in a pickle agian. Not for desktop machines this time but for the portable segment in which it use to lead.

My frustration is not so much with you as it is with the people that are going on about how great the new revs are. Its far more of a mixed bag if you ask me. Apple is capable of delivering nice hardware at the top of its line, unfortunately it doesn't compete with the top of the line in the Intel world. I just think it is foolish for people to judge Apple's progress agianst Apples own hardware. Even at that I can't see how anybody could stand up and say the new iBook is an improvement in value.





Unless the G5-M (ugh, what an awful name - how about G5-P, as in portable? No I still don't like it...) is nearing completion (i.e. will be ready for the next PB update), I think that this would be an incredibly foolish move on Apple's part. I, for one, have more faith in Apple than that...

It is my suspicion right now that Apple will have to look at alternatives to the G5 in its current implementation in order to produce portables with 64 bit technology. Now that could be a minor tweak with a built in memory controller of something more involved. I just see them having a hard time scaling performance and at the same time producing a portable that is acceptable to its customers.

Customers are the key here. You will not have people adopting the G5 in a portable simply because it is a G5 (baring the few that hang out here that will). That portable still has to retain a form factor acceptable to Apples customers along with good battery life and every thing else that makes a PowerBook a PowerBook.

Everything that I've stated is based on what is known today. It is obvious that Apple is working on low cost low power chips to facilitate the use of the 970 else where. Maybe the PowerBook is one of those targets. Lately though I've been of the opinion that Apple has somethng else it is working on to fill the PowerBook processor role. At this point it will be several months before we have a clear indication of what Apple is doing.

Thanks
Dave

Snowy_River
Apr 20, 2004, 06:30 PM
Actually, I am pretty sure the 1st specs were correct, yours aren't.

On September 1st, 2003 the line up was:

Rev A 12": 867 MHZ
Last TiBook 15": 1GHZ
Rev A 17": 1GHZ


On September 16th, the lineup became:

Rev B 12": 1GHZ
Rev A 15": 1GHZ or 1.25GHZ
Rev B 17": 1.33 GHZ


..incidently, I don't think the 17" was ever at 1.25GHZ. It went from 1GHZ, to 1.33GHZ, to its current 1.5GHZ.

So, with regards to the 17", for example, it DID go from its original 1GHZ speed on Sept 1st 2003 to its current 1.5GHZ.

If I am wrong, I am sure someone will correct me!

Yes, I realized this after I submitted the correction. I was merely trying to correct for the September update, to put things in the proper perspective. If he was going to quote numbers from just before one upgrade, he shouldn't compare them to numbers just after another update. Hey, we could look at it this way:

12" One Week Ago: 1GHz 12" Today: 1.33GHz (33% Speed boost in one week!!)
etc. ...

dontmakemehurtu
Apr 20, 2004, 06:31 PM
:(

pigwin32
Apr 20, 2004, 06:32 PM
how much faster is a single 1.6 G5 over the 1.5 PB?

how much for a photoshop filter?
how much for rotating an image in photoshop?
how much to scroll a powerpoint presentation (many pics)?
how much for recalculating a soundfile?

my guess it's 10%-20%. so as a nonprofessional user would you notice the difference?
has anybody some experience with a 1.6 G5 and a 1.25 PB (since the 1.5 isn't out long enough)?

I think the point is more that Apple will be tuning their os and apps to take advantage of the G5 chip. Right now we are seeing good performance increments just be upgrading to Panther, in future we will see Apple tuning OSX for the G5. The G4's will be supported but fewer performance improvements in software will be apparent on G4 machines.

James L
Apr 20, 2004, 07:20 PM
12" One Week Ago: 1GHz 12" Today: 1.33GHz (33% Speed boost in one week!!)
etc. ...


:D :p

lha72
Apr 20, 2004, 07:24 PM
Old processor technology, slow bus, slow hard drive, mediocre display, all crammed into an expensive slim case. Like winintel celeron, G4 laptops will be with us for a long time. As long as the masses keep repeating the manta, "too hot, cooling problems, too much power drain, too hard, can't be done" there is no incentive for Apple to drop its celeron and build a G5 laptop that serious users can expect to be a viable platform for the next five years. I'm not buying a G4 laptop, I have a Dual G4 Desktop, why drop $2+K for a giant leap backward.

teksmex69
Apr 20, 2004, 07:45 PM
If you take a comparable Pc laptop processor say the Pentium Mobile, they max out at 1.7Ghz. So the 1.5Ghz G4 certianly isn't slow.

i see how it works now. when it doesn't bolster your case, you do _not_ use mhz directly to compare processors. now that it seems (to you) that it does bolster your case, you _do_ use a direct mhz for mhz comparison.

we all understood what you meant. 1.5Ghz isn't so different a number from 1.7Ghz.

except that you would be dead wrong.

a 1.5Ghz g4 based powerbook CANNOT catch a 1.3Ghz Pentium M.

It's not even close, and the 1.3 Pentium-M w/1meg cache is now going into sub $900 pc notebooks.

I'm about to get myself a new powerbook. They look fantastic and I appreciate Apple for providing such a nice alternative to windows. But it annoys me to no end when people can't deal with reality. I'm not getting a new powerbooks because it's "almost as fast as a centrino based notebook"

it's not. not even close.

i'm buying my powerbook for entirely different reasons, the reasons being discussed to death ad nauseum within these forums.

to the other fellow proclaiming that hardly anyone should need a G5 powerbook, I honestly don't know what to tell you. i'm tempted to flame you, but i'll just say this:

apple's market is shrinking. in order to survive, this first needs to slow, stop and then reverse.

we're not even on step one. personally, i want apple around in 10 years....and they will be, but this horse crap you are spouting about "no one needs a g5 powerbook" is exactly the narrow mindset that has cost apple dearly.

they've finally realized (almost too late) that they were headed for BIG trouble if they didn't start ratcheting up the speed. and pronto.

The G5 Powermac has stopped the bleeding, but we're still not in the black.

the rest of their line needs ratcheting.

faster then asap.

Spazmodius
Apr 20, 2004, 07:51 PM
Actually I think in reality if it's not enough, then people will just buy a PC notebook. That's the danger for Apple. Outside a dedicated core of fanatic users, people aren't going to say "I need a really fast portable now, but Apple won't have the G5 PowerBook ready until next year. OK, no problem, I'll just sit on my hands and wait for Steve-o". There's no need for patience. Users will just switch...back to x86.



First off, my complements on an excellent post. Second, I am one of those people who, not necessarily wanting to move to WinTel, is feeling somewhat pressured to by the reality of Apple's hardware offerings. I NEED a portable. I also NEED to run image analysis and editing apps. I sometimes churn through monster stacks of images with a Java app. called ImageJ, which looks virtually identical on the Mac and the PC. Heck, for that, I could run Linux on a PC laptop, I don't even need Windows (I would probably opt for that, actually). Anyway, the fact of the matter is, for that kind of work, PM-equipped laptops are opertating, today, at roughly double the speed of very comparably-priced Apple laptops. I know this because I have seen it with my own eyes. I have processed the same stack of images using ImageJ 1.31 on a 1.25GHz G4 15" Al Powerbook (Price $2300/Combo drive) with a gig of RAM, and a 1.4GHz IBM Thinkpad T41 (Price $1900/CDRW/DVD-ROM)...fairly comparable computers interms EXCEPT the processor. The difference spoke for itself. That extra 175MHz in speed on the PM translates, in my hands, to over double the speed of the G4 Powerbook...roughly two minutes and ten seconds for the G4 to process the stack vs. about one 50 seconds for the PM. Talk about megahertz myth. The G4 has 512k L2 cache, and runs off a 167MHz bus. The PM has a 1 meg L2 cache, and runs off a 400MHz bus. The effect these differences have speak for themselves. After borrowing to computers to run this very real-world benchmark, I spent a bood portion of the afternoon feeling depressed. I love my Mac Portable. It's built like a truck, is SO damn easy to use, I love the interface, I can't say enough nice, warm, fuzzy things about it.

But sometimes warm fuzzies don't cut it. I need to get work done. Work that can really chew through serious hardware resources. I've seen it with my own eyes: The Thinkpad is the practical champ, hands down. For things I NEED to do, at my job, it mops the floor with the G4. The extra boost to 1.5 GHz isn't going to close the gap all that much. So why bother?And when I compare the Thinkpad with my own Ti667, well...I don't even want to talk about that, the disparity is so horrific.

So, I'm rapidly approaching the point where watching the spinning beachball is eating up significant chunks of my time on the Ti667. If I wasn't such a Mac whore I would have ditched the thing last year. I don't even need Apple to beat WinTel. I'd be happy with near-parity. I'd just like to see that stack transform and spit out data on my Mac Laptop the way it did on my colleagues Stinkpad. When will that happen? If "never" is the answer, I can't stay on the Mac, no matter how much I love it. It's simply not a viable portable option. I'm stretching my patience to the limit just waiting until x-mas on the probably vain hope that there are radically new portable chip offerings in the works. If there are not, my hand is pretty much forced. :(

chasingapple
Apr 20, 2004, 08:31 PM
There are more factors in an Apple notebook then just the CPU people, you sound like a bunch of PC overclocking / hardware swapping freaks.

Think - OS X
Think - UNIX
Think - iLife
Think - NO Viruses
Think - NO Spyware
Think - Form Factor

Remember why you chose Apple, and stop being a PC hardware clone. If Mhz matter that much to you or if a G4 1.5Ghz machine just "CANT" do what you need it to do (yeah right), then get a Dual G5 Powermac for that work, or you can just go get yourself a PC and deal with losing all of the above.

Now I would love for someone to actually show/tell me exactly what that G4 1.5Ghz machine WILL NOT do for them that ONLY a G5 would?

Im waiting...

aavatsma
Apr 20, 2004, 08:46 PM
There are more factors in an Apple notebook then just the CPU people, you sound like a bunch of PC overclocking / hardware swapping freaks.

Think - OS X
Think - UNIX
Think - iLife
Think - NO Viruses
Think - NO Spyware
Think - Form Factor

Remember why you chose Apple, and stop being a PC hardware clone. If Mhz matter that much to you or if a G4 1.5Ghz machine just "CANT" do what you need it to do (yeah right), then get a Dual G5 Powermac for that work, or you can just go get yourself a PC and deal with losing all of the above.

Now I would love for someone to actually show/tell me exactly what that G4 1.5Ghz machine WILL NOT do for them that ONLY a G5 would?

Im waiting...

Stop trolling and read some of the messages above. Especially oingoboingos posts is very good. the fastest powerbook is a lot slower than a decent intel-laptop. Do you not understand that this is a problem for apple?

josh_m
Apr 20, 2004, 08:52 PM
It seems like there is a whole lot of misinformation going around about what is preventing G5s from being in the PBs now, so I thought I'd weigh in with my opinion.

I would assume that the primary factors in the design of the G5 Powerbooks would be:
- Same or at worst slightly higher power consumption.
- Higher clock speed than the current PBs, by at least 100 MHz across the range. (1.3->1.4, 1.5->1.6 GHz)

The battery life is a primary selling factor, and the higher clock speed is necessary for sales purposes. While the G5 has roughly the same performance as the G4 clock-for-clock, the subsystems are much improved, so I personally would buy the G5 over the G4 anyway.

Ace's Hardware posted a link to the power consumption of the new 970FXs, the new G5s (low power) in the Xserve. Power consumption at 2.0 GHz was 39W, at 1.2: 12W, and at 2.5: 55W. From this we can calculate that the G5s would use approx. 18W at 1.4 and 25W at 1.6 GHz. The current power consumption of the mobile G4s I believe is approx 15W for the 1.33 and 23W for the 1.5 GHz, from data from the Motorola's last G4 announcement. (This means that the G5s are NOT much hotter than G4s at comparable clock speeds, as some people are saying.)

We have a gain of 2-3W for this scenario, which is not too bad. If we jump 200 MHz instead, this increases to a gap of 5-7W, which is getting a little uncomfortable. However, once the 970FX production has increased, IBM can probably handpick processors which can run at a lower voltage (particularly at these lower clock speeds), which will probably lower the power consumption enough to go with the 200 MHz increase.

So, we can get the G5 processor into a Powerbook without affecting power consumption. The problem arises from the subsytems. In a desktop G5, we can have the processor consuming 50W without a problem, and the support logic (all the motherboard chips) probably use somewhere between 10-20W. However, if we just dumped this into the laptop, we'd have a processor+motherboard that used 30-40W. This is a problem.

The support logic needs to be redesigned for low power. A small part of this has probably already been done for the G5 Xserves, but there's probably more work there. One thing that would help, as others have mentioned, is moving the memory controller on die (ala Opteron/Athlon64). This would require a new CPU revision.

Beyond these considerations, I would presume that new Powerbooks would come with the full modern trappings of the G5. This would include SATA drives, of which the 2.5" variety are not yet widely available. No other notebooks have SATA drives.

It would be fair to say that we can expect Powerbook G5s in the normal timeframe, probably 8-10 months from now.


References:
Portable G4 power consumption: http://arstechnica.com/news/posts/1077600172.html
Power Consumption of new G5 (970FX): http://www.aceshardware.com/read_news.jsp?id=80000467
IBM document info: http://www.aceshardware.com/forum?read=115063089

chasingapple
Apr 20, 2004, 08:53 PM
Stop trolling and read some of the messages above. Especially oingoboingos posts is very good. the fastest powerbook is a lot slower than a decent intel-laptop. Do you not understand that this is a problem for apple?

Trolling, LOL. Ok, then go get an Intel notebook and lube up for Bill. Next time answer my question, I have read the entire thread.

oingoboingo
Apr 20, 2004, 08:54 PM
Ok, there's been plenty of discussion over perceived heat and power consumption issues with the G5 CPUs, especially with regards to their use in future PowerBooks, and how they compare to the 'cooler' G4s currently in use. I was interested in the actual power consumptions as specified by IBM and Motorola, respective manufacturers of the new PowerPC 970FX (aka: G5) and the PowerPC MPC7447A (aka: G4) CPUs. The information I found is available at:

http://e-www.motorola.com/webapp/sps/library/documentationlist.jsp?rootNodeId=01&nodeId=018rH3bTdG8653&Device=MPC7447A&DocTypeKey=10KsdK42&Results=25

and

http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/7874C7DA8607C0B287256BF3006FBE54

From these publications, the voltage and power consumptions are:

- Motorola MPC7447A (G4) (133/166MHz FSB, 512KB L2 cache) power consumption at 1.42GHz: 19W (1.3V internal voltage, 1.8V/2.5V I/O voltage)
- IBM PowerPC 970FX (G5) (1.0GHz FSB, 512KB L2 cache) power consumption at 2.0GHz: 24.5W (1.0V internal voltage, 1.3V I/O voltage)

In addition, the PPC970FX is reported by IBM to require a power draw of only 12.3W when running at 1.4GHz. IBM specifies that the 970FX also uses the same physical chip interface as the 970 currently used in shipping PowerMac G5s (576-pin CBGA in a 25mm x 25mm layout).

For comparison, the older 1.33GHz MPC7447 G4s used in earlier PowerBooks are reported to consume 21.3W, barely less than that reported for the 2.0GHz PowerPC 970FX.

From these manufacturer quoted figures, it appears that the new PowerPC 970FX chip, should not consume significantly more power, or produce significantly more heat, than the G4 CPUs already in use across Apple's iBook and PowerBook range. It also appears that the 2.0GHz PowerPC 970FX, when running at a throttled back 1.4GHz, requires a power draw of only 12.3W...which again is only marginally more than is required by the low-power version of Motorola's MPC7447A when running at 1.167GHz (9.3W).

Hopefully these figures will be useful in future debates over the design and implementation of future PowerBook G5 systems, especially in relation to cooling and power consumption issues (which seem to be generating quite a bit of emotional heat in themselves :) )

chasingapple
Apr 20, 2004, 08:57 PM
Ok, there's been plenty of discussion over perceived heat and power consumption issues with the G5 CPUs, especially with regards to their use in future PowerBooks, and how they compare to the 'cooler' G4s currently in use. I was interested in the actual power consumptions as specified by IBM and Motorola, respective manufacturers of the new PowerPC 970FX (aka: G5) and the PowerPC MPC7447A (aka: G4) CPUs. The information I found is available at:

http://e-www.motorola.com/webapp/sps/library/documentationlist.jsp?rootNodeId=01&nodeId=018rH3bTdG8653&Device=MPC7447A&DocTypeKey=10KsdK42&Results=25

and

http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/7874C7DA8607C0B287256BF3006FBE54

From these publications, the voltage and power consumptions are:

- Motorola MPC7447A (G4) (133/166MHz FSB, 512KB L2 cache) power consumption at 1.42GHz: 19W (1.3V internal voltage, 1.8V/2.5V I/O voltage)
- IBM PowerPC 970FX (G5) (1.0GHz FSB, 512KB L2 cache) power consumption at 2.0GHz: 24.5W (1.0V internal voltage, 1.3V I/O voltage)

In addition, the PPC970FX is reported by IBM to require a power draw of only 12.3W when running at 1.4GHz. IBM specifies that the 970FX also uses the same physical chip interface as the 970 currently used in shipping PowerMac G5s (576-pin CBGA in a 25mm x 25mm layout).

For comparison, the older 1.33GHz MPC7447 G4s used in earlier PowerBooks are reported to consume 21.3W, barely less than that reported for the 2.0GHz PowerPC 970FX.

From these manufacturer quoted figures, it appears that the new PowerPC 970FX chip, should not consume significantly more power, or produce significantly more heat, than the G4 CPUs already in use across Apple's iBook and PowerBook range. It also appears that the 2.0GHz PowerPC 970FX, when running at a throttled back 1.4GHz, requires a power draw of only 12.3W...which again is only marginally more than is required by the low-power version of Motorola's MPC7447A when running at 1.167GHz (9.3W).

Hopefully these figures will be useful in future debates over the design and implementation of future PowerBook G5 systems, especially in relation to cooling and power consumption issues (which seem to be generating quite a bit of emotional heat in themselves :) )

Finally something constructive posted. Not another whiny kid bitching cause he didnt get his way with this revision, bravo!

Perhaps there is more to it other then heat, from what I have read it would seem there are not enough of these G5's to satisfy the PowerMac, xServe, and a PowerBook line at this time?

ingenious
Apr 20, 2004, 08:58 PM
Well, the thing is that the 12" and the 17" were announced in Jan 03, the 15" even back in Nov 02" So the span you mention is in fact 15 1/2 months for the 12" and the 17" and 17 1/2 months for the 15". But still, that's not a bad progress.


but remember the bump in Nov 03 that brought the 12" to 1 GHz, the 15" to 1.25 GHz and the 17" to 1.33 GHz?

edit: oops i put the wrong date! It should be Sept 03. Now I see others have posted this..... sorry. :D

Mr. MacPhisto
Apr 20, 2004, 09:01 PM
Would that be the T series 1.7GHZ (T41)? I've also issued those and can't say I have the same experience. They run very hot if you actually try to push them. When I run heavy processor intensive stuff it gets much hotter than my iBook does running the same kind of stuff. They also are expensive.
$2900 for the laptop with a 14" screen, 512MB, Combo drive. It has a fast spin HDD, but even so - I still see the Powerbook as very competitive with it. It can have a larger screen, is more durable, runs cooler (and I've tested this out). I like IBM laptops (they are the only PC laptop I will buy for clients), but they still run XP and can run hot - and are very expensive.

The biggest problem doesn't lie with Apple anyways. It is going to take time for IBM chips to circulate through their entire lineups. I still have hope they will use some of IBM's other offerings, but I'm not sure what their status is with Moto - or if Moto will do anything when they're rumored to move to 90nm sometime this summer. If the G4 had a faster FSB with true DDR support coupled with 1MB+ L2 cache it would be competitive with Intel's mobile offerings.

The fact of the matter for now is that Apple has light, small laptops. If you want PC laptops that are as portable you'll have to pay the price you would for an Apple - most likely more. If Apple dropped anything into large, cheap plastic enclosures they could cut their prices way down. Problem is that they can't have dozens upon dozens of configs. They decided to make all of their laptops overly portable - and the increase in cost is part of that.

Bull. We have 1.7Ghz IBM Pentium M laptops here in the office I work at that are 1" thick with a 400Mhz FSB. This thing runs DAMN cool. Does the fan turn on from time to time? Sure. In fact right now I'm doing a stress test on a laptop before I deploy it to the user. The fan is on but short of sticking ear 3" from the vent I can't hear it and the heat? Maybe 90*-95*, if that, coming out of the vent. Frankly I'm NOT impressed by Apple *books that have fans that almost NEVER turn on. A couple friends of mine have iBooks and the base of these things get bloody hot. Enough that I'm concerned for the long term reliability of these systems. (e.g. super hot systems = better chance of hardware failure.) Oh and as for battery life on that laptop I speced out above the system get aprox 4-5 hours depending on what you are doing with the system.

reorx
Apr 20, 2004, 09:12 PM
Have you every noticed how the people that complain about dick measuring are the ones not to measure up!

Its a shame that people only see the world form their frame of reference. The I"I never do anthing challenging so why would anyone else" mentality. These are probally the same people that go hiking in the moutains with a rope but never use that rope to climb the mountain.

There are many professions that can and will make use of all the computing resources they have available to them. Just because one can't not imagine this does not mean that it is not the case.

As to a 970 based portable it is very apparent that the 970FX is not ready to go into a portable and may never be ready. Sure this upsets people that would love to have a PowerBook with modern performance capabilities. It does need to be kept in perspective Apple will have faster machines in the future, how those machine come to market is a mystery. We could see dual processors or a special purpose chipset or a truely improved G4. That is the future, in the present many people are justified in their frustration with Apple.

Thanks
dave


I think the point on all of this is: If you need the CPU power, buy it. Don't bitch and whine that you can't get the power of 10 dual Opteron blades in a laptop for $19.99 that weighs 4 lbs and runs 10 hrs on a single charge and can render, in real-time, the next epsiode of Star Wars.

If you really needed all that speed, you can have it. Its just going to cost you money. Go spend it...please!

Tell me, what did people ever do with themselves 5 years ago without teraflops on the desktop?? Oh my gawd, its like, the land before time! :rolleyes:

oingoboingo
Apr 20, 2004, 09:20 PM
There are more factors in an Apple notebook then just the CPU people, you sound like a bunch of PC overclocking / hardware swapping freaks.

Think - OS X
Think - UNIX
Think - iLife
Think - NO Viruses
Think - NO Spyware
Think - Form Factor

Remember why you chose Apple, and stop being a PC hardware clone. If Mhz matter that much to you or if a G4 1.5Ghz machine just "CANT" do what you need it to do (yeah right), then get a Dual G5 Powermac for that work, or you can just go get yourself a PC and deal with losing all of the above.

Now I would love for someone to actually show/tell me exactly what that G4 1.5Ghz machine WILL NOT do for them that ONLY a G5 would?

Im waiting...

There's an example in this thread...using the Java ImageJ application to perform image processing on a large stack of images (I've actually used this app too). Image analysis is slow and CPU/RAM intensive, and it's something that often gets done 'in the field' (medical images in a clinic, geographical images on site or in a portable office, or moving around the lab analysing 2D electrophoresis images (where my personal experience in this area comes from)). Yes, a 1.5GHz G4 will get the job done. Of course it's not actually physically incapable of running the code. It's just that a 2GHz G5 PowerBook would get it done quite a bit faster. Who wants to wait 5 minutes for a job to finish when they can wait 4 minutes? Or 3? When you repeat that operation a number of times throughout the day, the total time savings could be several hours per week. A 1.5GHz G4 might be fast enough for some...but for others it's not, and it's a difference of hundreds or even thousands of hours of saved time over the lifetime of the notebook.

For office use, web browsing, e-mail and many other tasks...yes...the G4 chips are great. I have a 1GHz 12" PowerBook and it handles those tasks without breaking a sweat...and yes, all of those reasons you mentioned above are excellent reasons for choosing an Apple system in the first place, no doubt. But there are always going to be users who require CPUs which are faster, and they're not going to want to have to be tied to a desk, or to be burning their work onto CDs or DVDs every time they want to take something home from the office to work on. Any time you're waiting for the computer, the computer isn't fast enough. Period.

It is completely valid for pro-portable users to want something faster than a 1.5GHz G4. Scientific and technical computing is just one example where PowerBook G5s will be graciously received (as I mentioned, it's an area where I have personal experience).

avus
Apr 20, 2004, 09:20 PM
Let me say this: Apple didn't say that it wouldn't offer the PowerBook G5. It merely said that, on the day the new PowerBook G4 was introduced, people shouldn't expect the PowerBook G5 soon. That's all.

I am not an Apple apologist. I even agree with many of you that Pentium-M is a very nice chip. However, too many of you sounds too depressed, almost suicidal! LIGHTEN UP!

chasingapple
Apr 20, 2004, 09:27 PM
There's an example in this thread...using the Java ImageJ application to perform image processing on a large stack of images (I've actually used this app too). Image analysis is slow and CPU/RAM intensive, and it's something that often gets done 'in the field' (medical images in a clinic, geographical images on site or in a portable office, or moving around the lab analysing 2D electrophoresis images (where my personal experience in this area comes from)). Yes, a 1.5GHz G4 will get the job done. Of course it's not actually physically incapable of running the code. It's just that a 2GHz G5 PowerBook would get it done quite a bit faster. Who wants to wait 5 minutes for a job to finish when they can wait 4 minutes? Or 3? When you repeat that operation a number of times throughout the day, the total time savings could be several hours per week. A 1.5GHz G4 might be fast enough for some...but for others it's not, and it's a difference of hundreds or even thousands of hours of saved time over the lifetime of the notebook.

For office use, web browsing, e-mail and many other tasks...yes...the G4 chips are great. I have a 1GHz 12" PowerBook and it handles those tasks without breaking a sweat...and yes, all of those reasons you mentioned above are excellent reasons for choosing an Apple system in the first place, no doubt. But there are always going to be users who require CPUs which are faster, and they're not going to want to have to be tied to a desk, or to be burning their work onto CDs or DVDs every time they want to take something home from the office to work on. Any time you're waiting for the computer, the computer isn't fast enough. Period.

It is completely valid for pro-portable users to want something faster than a 1.5GHz G4. Scientific and technical computing is just one example where PowerBook G5s will be graciously received (as I mentioned, it's an area where I have personal experience).

If it is that important to shave a few minutes then would it not better suit you to get a Pentium-M based notebook for that job then? Honestly it is just a few minutes, and ThinkSecret reported that a new software SEED is heading out that improves Java, sounds like your Java problem is software related, not hardware.

Think of it this way, a computer is a TOOL, as anyone that deals with Cars or Hardware knows, there is no ONE tool for EVERY job, we all wish there was but it is not so. Sounds to me like IN YOUR CASE you are not using the right tool at this time for the job your doing, so go get the right tool. Perhaps in the future the MAC will be that tool but you need UBER speed for 1 app, get the right tool my friend :)

Matter of fact, I will help you a little. I spotted this a few days ago and for the hardware it has it is one hell of a deal in computers.

http://www.sagernotebook.com/pages/notebooks/product.cfm?ProductType=3760

Not to mention it is a very sexy notebook, perhaps that would be better for your situation?

Cheers.

Squire
Apr 20, 2004, 09:30 PM
Josh_m and oingoboing: Thanks for the informative posts.

Which leads to one underlying question: Do you think Apple could put a G5 in a laptop similar to their current offerings today or are they deliberately NOT doing so for other reasons? (Explain the "other reasons" if possible.)

You may begin...

;)


Squire

oingoboingo
Apr 20, 2004, 09:38 PM
If it is that important to shave a few minutes then would it not better suit you to get a Pentium-M based notebook for that job then? Honestly it is just a few minutes, and ThinkSecret reported that a new software SEED is heading out that improves Java, sounds like your Java problem is software related, not hardware.

I guess that was my original point a few posts back...if there are long delays for existing Mac users in getting G5 PowerBooks out, then heavy users who can switch to x86 will probably do that.

Think of it this way, a computer is a TOOL, as anyone that deals with Cars or Hardware knows, there is no ONE tool for EVERY job, we all wish there was but it is not so. Sounds to me like IN YOUR CASE you are not using the right tool at this time for the job your doing, so go get the right tool. Perhaps in the future the MAC will be that tool but you need UBER speed for 1 app, get the right tool my friend :)

You were originally asking for an example of what could possibly not be suitable for a 1.5GHz G4, and I provided one. So we both agree...the 1.5GHz G4 PowerBook isn't the right tool. A G5 PowerBook might well be though. I think we're all right back to where we started now :)

For the record, most of our image analysis is actually done with software written in C/C++, not Java. A computationally intensive task is a computationally intensive task, no matter what the language.

macfan76
Apr 20, 2004, 09:41 PM
Little off topic but when do you guys predict that we will see a G5 iMac?

oingoboingo
Apr 20, 2004, 09:45 PM
Josh_m and oingoboing: Thanks for the informative posts.

Which leads to one underlying question: Do you think Apple could put a G5 in a laptop similar to their current offerings today or are they deliberately NOT doing so for other reasons? (Explain the "other reasons" if possible.)

You may begin...

;)
Squire

Apple mentioned in its most recent financial results conference call that supplies of the cooler-running PowerPC 970FX from IBM are still very restricted. It was explicity mentioned as being the reason for XServe G5 delays. So between needing to fulfill backordered XServe G5 requests, and needing to advance the desktop PowerMac G5 line, I suspect PPC970FX chips are in high demand at the moment. PowerBooks may simply be further down the priority list here.

As Josh_m mentioned (I think it was him), the CPU is just one factor in the heat/power equation. The system controller will also generate a decent amount of heat. I don't know the exact figures (since it's an Apple proprietary design), but perhaps there may need to be some redesigning done there too.

Crossing over more into marketing, maybe Apple thinks it is time to refresh the physical appearance of the PowerBook line. Maybe they are busily working on a new form factor simply to keep the range looking fresh and new? Apple seems to like deliberately paced 6-9 month product cycles...maybe its partly to do with their internal product cycle? I'm sure there are reasons other than technical ones afoot.

dontmakemehurtu
Apr 20, 2004, 09:51 PM
:(

El Duderino
Apr 20, 2004, 09:57 PM
im starting to waiver on the idea of getting a mac, is it worth it to drop 2.5k on a 3-4 year old chip, probably the most advanced usage on this thing will be adobe photoshop and occasional UT2k4, if i were to have 1.5 gigs of ram...how well would it perform. i know that you cant compare desktops to notebooks but right now my 3.0ghz HT P4 is the only referance point i have. will a 1.5ghz PB be able to keep up with large amounts of rendering etc. or should i wait a year or 2 for the G5 and just go with a centrino. i love the idea of getting this PB but i need reasurance

[edit]P.S. i know this isnt the buyers guide thread but its too hard to get a response in there

reorx
Apr 20, 2004, 10:11 PM
First off, my complements on an excellent post. Second, I am one of those people who, not necessarily wanting to move to WinTel, is feeling somewhat pressured to by the reality of Apple's hardware offerings. I NEED a portable. I also NEED to run image analysis and editing apps. I sometimes churn through monster stacks of images with a Java app. called ImageJ, which looks virtually identical on the Mac and the PC. Heck, for that, I could run Linux on a PC laptop, I don't even need Windows (I would probably opt for that, actually). Anyway, the fact of the matter is, for that kind of work, PM-equipped laptops are opertating, today, at roughly double the speed of very comparably-priced Apple laptops. I know this because I have seen it with my own eyes. I have processed the same stack of images using ImageJ 1.31 on a 1.25GHz G4 15" Al Powerbook (Price $2300/Combo drive) with a gig of RAM, and a 1.4GHz IBM Thinkpad T41 (Price $1900/CDRW/DVD-ROM)...fairly comparable computers interms EXCEPT the processor. The difference spoke for itself. That extra 175MHz in speed on the PM translates, in my hands, to over double the speed of the G4 Powerbook...roughly two minutes and ten seconds for the G4 to process the stack vs. about one 50 seconds for the PM. Talk about megahertz myth. The G4 has 512k L2 cache, and runs off a 167MHz bus. The PM has a 1 meg L2 cache, and runs off a 400MHz bus. The effect these differences have speak for themselves. After borrowing to computers to run this very real-world benchmark, I spent a bood portion of the afternoon feeling depressed. I love my Mac Portable. It's built like a truck, is SO damn easy to use, I love the interface, I can't say enough nice, warm, fuzzy things about it.

But sometimes warm fuzzies don't cut it. I need to get work done. Work that can really chew through serious hardware resources. I've seen it with my own eyes: The Thinkpad is the practical champ, hands down. For things I NEED to do, at my job, it mops the floor with the G4. The extra boost to 1.5 GHz isn't going to close the gap all that much. So why bother?And when I compare the Thinkpad with my own Ti667, well...I don't even want to talk about that, the disparity is so horrific.

So, I'm rapidly approaching the point where watching the spinning beachball is eating up significant chunks of my time on the Ti667. If I wasn't such a Mac whore I would have ditched the thing last year. I don't even need Apple to beat WinTel. I'd be happy with near-parity. I'd just like to see that stack transform and spit out data on my Mac Laptop the way it did on my colleagues Stinkpad. When will that happen? If "never" is the answer, I can't stay on the Mac, no matter how much I love it. It's simply not a viable portable option. I'm stretching my patience to the limit just waiting until x-mas on the probably vain hope that there are radically new portable chip offerings in the works. If there are not, my hand is pretty much forced. :(

I think what you have here is an application problem. All Java VMs are not created equal... For a fair comparison, you'd have to turn off JIT and use Sun's Hot Spot VM for a fair Java-to-Java comparison... I don't doubt that the freaking amazing (I'm not kidding) instruction decoders and schedulers in the current crop of x86 cpus make a huge impact on the performance of "average" JIT compiled code, versus a traditional VM. The massive L2 doesn't hurt either... :D I just think that Java is a poor language for intensive computational tasks...and I'm a Java developer! Its just not its core competency...

Mr. MacPhisto
Apr 20, 2004, 10:32 PM
im starting to waiver on the idea of getting a mac, is it worth it to drop 2.5k on a 3-4 year old chip, probably the most advanced usage on this thing will be adobe photoshop and occasional UT2k4, if i were to have 1.5 gigs of ram...how well would it perform. i know that you cant compare desktops to notebooks but right now my 3.0ghz HT P4 is the only referance point i have. will a 1.5ghz PB be able to keep up with large amounts of rendering etc. or should i wait a year or 2 for the G5 and just go with a centrino. i love the idea of getting this PB but i need reasurance

[edit]P.S. i know this isnt the buyers guide thread but its too hard to get a response in there

Photoshop tends to run pretty well, even on G4s, due to the Altivec enhancement. If all you're doing is that and Unreal Tournament, it would meet your needs. It wouldn't be as speeded as the P4 - though I would say it would crash less than the Centrino or the P4 - or require a reboot less often. Windows tends to clog up over time, whereas OSX, in my experience, does not. That could save you time, depending on your experience with Windows. I spend about five-six hours a week working on Macs for any technical issues or setup vs. over 30 hours for the PCs - and they account for only 11% of the systems I've installed or setup.

Also, don't take benchmarks very seriously. It's difficult to compare across platforms - especially when most benchmarks are not well optimized for Macs (any AfterEffects comparison is bogus, for instance, because Adobe hasn't optimized it properly for the Mac).

So, I can't give you a proper recommendation. If you often experience a PC crashing when trying to do renders, etc then the Mac could save you time because they generally don't crash (I've run on OS X for nearly two years and it has not crashed a single time - and I've attempted to get it to crash. I keep my computer on at all times, letting it sleep when I don't use it. The only restarts I've had to do were for updates or when I installed Panther).

Another thing to consider is service. I had to have my iBook repaired once. I took it to the Apple Store on Wednesday at 3PM. They took it and shipped it out that day. Airborne Express was knocking at my door Friday at 9:30AM with my laptop. Less than 48 hours. I've never experienced that from anyone else.

mvc
Apr 20, 2004, 10:38 PM
I think what you have here is an application problem. All Java VMs are not created equal... For a fair comparison, you'd have to turn off JIT and use Sun's Hot Spot VM for a fair Java-to-Java comparison... I don't doubt that the freaking amazing (I'm not kidding) instruction decoders and schedulers in the current crop of x86 cpus make a huge impact on the performance of "average" JIT compiled code, versus a traditional VM. The massive L2 doesn't hurt either... :D I just think that Java is a poor language for intensive computational tasks...and I'm a Java developer! Its just not its core competency...

Seems ironic that the Java VM on these PC's is superior to those from Sun themselves (and on Mac), when Bill has gone to so much trouble in the past to try and dilute Java with proprietry Microsoft versions. Although, now, with the Sun/Microsoft Unholy alliance anything is possible. Open the gates of Hell, and you never know WHAT might come out. :(

chasingapple
Apr 20, 2004, 11:09 PM
I guess that was my original point a few posts back...if there are long delays for existing Mac users in getting G5 PowerBooks out, then heavy users who can switch to x86 will probably do that.



You were originally asking for an example of what could possibly not be suitable for a 1.5GHz G4, and I provided one. So we both agree...the 1.5GHz G4 PowerBook isn't the right tool. A G5 PowerBook might well be though. I think we're all right back to where we started now :)

Actually no, I asked what the G5 can do that the G4 1.5Ghz CANNOT. The G4 PowerBook is up to the task, you just want to save a minute or 2, hardly a basis for claiming the G4 is not up to the job, your just impatient ;)

Cmon man, a minute or 2?

chasingapple
Apr 20, 2004, 11:21 PM
Lets compare the latest G4 1.5Ghz machine and a high end Intel PC. We will go ahead and note the Intel based system is faster in the notebook, matter of fact we will directly compare it to a dragster, full ethano,l fully bored out speed demon from hell. Then we will call the G4 1.5Ghz a Porsche, not the fastest on the block but high performance and tuned.

The dragster shoots off at blinding speeds (and high noise levels mind you) for a short amount of time then it either runs out of gas or comes to a crashing stop. Intel chips go fast but since Windows is the driver it will only perform well for a short amount of time before the system becomes unstable or just flat out crashes, losing work in the progress and taking MORE time then it should. Windows is the worst driver in the world and thinks riding up on the curbs is ok, we can patch them if they break!

The Porsche takes off itself, takes everything you throw at it and keeps it up FAR longer then the dragster, has very little chance of crashing (due to the speed being slower) and is made for more heavy duty driving. The G4 also is a very efficient chip, it takes anything you throw at it and keeps on going, rarely does it crash because inside the Porsche driving is OS X, the best driver in the world, and rarely does he screw up. He has experience, know-how, insane amounts of skills.

So the question is before you, which driver do you want? Which car is going to be the better in the longhaul? Are you really saving that much time with a Pentium based PC with all the restarts, crashes, security flaws, etc etc etc, or are you better off waiting an extra few seconds and running flawlessly?

gensor
Apr 20, 2004, 11:22 PM
From tonight Tawian investor site
2004/04/20 Taiwan: TSMC (2330 TT, NT$59.5), UMC (2303 TT, NT$31.5): TSMC and UMC benefit from poor yield of IBM's 12" fab


IBM facing poor yield of 0.13um and 90nm
Main customers such as nVidia and Qualcomm are switching back to TSMC and UMC
Maintain BUY recommendations on TSMC and UMC

According to the "Economic Daily," nVidia, Qualcomm, Broadcom, Cisco and Xilinx are switching back from IBM foundry to TSMC and UMC due to the lower yield of IBM's 12" fab. IBM's lower yield of 0.13um and 90nm, and reducing IP revenue are causing IBM's 1Q losses in the semiconductor division.

Analyst comment:
1) We believe that IBM's lower 12" yield in 1Q04 will benefit TSMC and UMC going forward. The order rotation from IBM back to TSMC and UMC is expected to begin in 2Q04. We expect TSMC to show 8-10% and UMC 10% QoQ sales growth in 2Q04.

2) We expect UMC to benefit from capacity support from SiS and He-Jian beginning in 2Q04, which to show stronger revenue growth momentum than TSMC. However, we retain our BUY on both TSMC and UMC, due to their leading position in the technology universe, and capacity ramp-up, respectively.

gensor
Apr 20, 2004, 11:23 PM

~Shard~
Apr 20, 2004, 11:39 PM
Why does Apple stick by IBM when everyone else switching to TSMC and UMC?

Why does Apple always do things different from everyone else? ;) :cool:

thatwendigo
Apr 20, 2004, 11:46 PM
Why does Apple always do things different from everyone else? ;) :cool:

Dude, didn'y you watch your commercials?

It's because they're he CRAZY ones... ;)

~Shard~
Apr 20, 2004, 11:47 PM
Actually no, I asked what the G5 can do that the G4 1.5Ghz CANNOT. The G4 PowerBook is up to the task, you just want to save a minute or 2, hardly a basis for claiming the G4 is not up to the job, your just impatient ;)

Cmon man, a minute or 2?

I agree - is a little extra delay really going to kill you? Now it's a different story if you're a Pro user - if you are getting PAID to do graphic design, etc. and your livelihood depends on how fast you can render images, design things, etc., alright - time is money then for you. I appreciate that. But just because a G4 is slower than a G5 at some tasks does NOT mean it is crippled or not "up to the job". Some people are a little impatient it seems...

I also find it ironic that for the past few months people have been complaining on this site over and over every week about no updates "this Tuesday" - and now finally we have updates and what do they do? Complain again. Some people are never happy. :rolleyes:

chasingapple
Apr 20, 2004, 11:50 PM
I agree - is a little extra delay really going to kill you? Now it's a different story if you're a Pro user - if you are getting PAID to do graphic design, etc. and your livelihood depends on how fast you can render images, design things, etc., alright - time is money then for you. I appreciate that. But just because a G4 is slower than a G5 at some tasks does NOT mean it is crippled or not "up to the job". Some people are a little impatient it seems...

I also find it ironic that for the past few months people have been complaining on this site over and over every week about no updates "this Tuesday" - and now finally we have updates and what do they do? Complain again. Some people are never happy. :rolleyes:

Correct, they live to bitch about stuff. And thus this thread is dead, nothing else to offer but to listen to the children rant and rave and bitch and moan, im off to find a real discussion, cheers mates, go back to bitching now

~Shard~
Apr 20, 2004, 11:55 PM
Dude, didn'y you watch your commercials?

It's because they're he CRAZY ones... ;)

If Apple is crazy, then I'd hate to be sane... :cool:

thatwendigo
Apr 20, 2004, 11:57 PM
I agree - is a little extra delay really going to kill you? Now it's a different story if you're a Pro user - if you are getting PAID to do graphic design, etc. and your livelihood depends on how fast you can render images, design things, etc., alright - time is money then for you. I appreciate that. But just because a G4 is slower than a G5 at some tasks does NOT mean it is crippled or not "up to the job". Some people are a little impatient it seems...

No, no... It's that we don't have eight G5s and a Radeon 8000000 with 6GB of RAM in the PowerBook and a headless iMac that makes the whole of Apple suck, Shard. Haven't you been paying attention? Every user is so efficient at their use of cycles that there's never a spare one in their machines and so they're always waiting, waiting, waiting for some important task. Why, sometimes, it takes as much as a minute for a render to finish! :rolleyes:

On a related note, my dad and I were talking about Apple and the NAB releases. I'd been reading up on them and bringing him up to speed, and when I laid them out in a certain order so that he would see where I was going... Well, when you see an old signal processing engineer's eyes light up like that, it's an interesting sight. :D

I think that we're about to see a revolution in computing that will be every bit as powerful as what Apple did in the early 80s. It's starting at the pro level, where the hardware definitely exists, but will trickle down as solid uses are created. Xsan and XGrid are the first steps into a true, distributed network computer in the home. Apple is going to be selling people easily linked home supercomputers, in other words, within the next three to five years. Sony's on the idea, too, with their ideas for Cell, but I think Apple has a better chance to do it.

Take my dad's house for example... He's got three macs active at the moment, and at any given time, at least one is idle. With a sufficient network speed, the one that he's using could parcel background tasks off to the idling machine and let it do the work. Apple already does this with Shake, and the plugin architecture for XGrid should let them expand it tremendously.

The fact that Xsan runs on fibrechannel says something to me, namely that high-bandwidth distributed computing is about to become an enterprise reality. It's like the old idea that Apple would move with an Oracle-like netboot terminal, only in the opposite direction.

I also find it ironic that for the past few months people have been complaining on this site over and over every week about no updates "this Tuesday" - and now finally we have updates and what do they do? Complain again. Some people are never happy. :rolleyes:

But.. It doesn't have a G6! An anonymous rumor on a website said that the chips should be done, and someone on a board said it should work and that it ought to cost $500 less. I waaaaaant one now! :mad: :confused: :rolleyes: :p

~Shard~
Apr 21, 2004, 12:08 AM
No, no... It's that we don't have eight G5s and a Radeon 8000000 with 6GB of RAM in the PowerBook and a headless iMac that makes the whole of Apple suck, Shard. Haven't you been paying attention? Every user is so efficient at their use of cycles that there's never a spare one in their machines and so they're always waiting, waiting, waiting for some important task. Why, sometimes, it takes as much as a minute for a render to finish! :rolleyes:

Gee, thanks a lot, you just blew up my sarcasm detector... ;) Yah, sorry about that, I forgot that everyone is perfectly efficient and always has their Mac at 100% utilization, thus needing more horsepower. Until you can render all of Finding Nemo in 1 second, I guess you'll just have to complain some more... ;)


I think that we're about to see a revolution in computing that will be every bit as powerful as what Apple did in the early 80s. It's starting at the pro level, where the hardware definitely exists, but will trickle down as solid uses are created. Xsan and XGrid are the first steps into a true, distributed network computer in the home. Apple is going to be selling people easily linked home supercomputers, in other words, within the next three to five years. Sony's on the idea, too, with their ideas for Cell, but I think Apple has a better chance to do it.

I agree - Apple has always been a pioneer, and these updates and extensions to the Pro world will have significant impacts on the rest of the computing world, sooner than one might think. Not only are the tools becoming more and more powerful, but as you cite, concepts such as xSan and xGrid will pave the way for increased productivity and efficiency. Well, only if you have a G5 PowerBook I guess... :p

But.. It doesn't have a G6! An anonymous rumor on a website said that the chips should be done, and someone on a board said it should work and that it ought to cost $500 less. I waaaaaant one now! :mad: :confused: :rolleyes: :p

Sounds like your best bet is just to buy an AMD FX-52 with a 9800XT graphics card - I hear they benchmark faster than the G6s already and can display 5 extra frames per second in UT2004 with everything turned on. Now THAT'S the future of computing - none of this xSan crap... ;) :cool:

thatwendigo
Apr 21, 2004, 12:17 AM
Gee, thanks a lot, you just blew up my sarcasm detector... ;)

I'll buy you a new one. How does Wal-Mart sound as a supplier?

Yah, sorry about that, I forgot that everyone is perfectly efficient and always has their Mac at 100% utilization, thus needing more horsepower. Until you can render all of Finding Nemo in 1 second, I guess you'll just have to complain some more... ;)

As much as you meant that to be wry and sardonic, good sir Shard, I saw someone say something in that vein. To him, computers will never be fast enough if he has to wait for anything to be done. It's either instant or too slow. :rolleyes:

In the words of the Dread Pirate Roberts: "Get used to disappointment."

I agree - Apple has always been a pioneer, and these updates and extensions to the Pro world will have significant impacts on the rest of the computing world, sooner than one might think. Not only are the tools becoming more and more powerful, but as you cite, concepts such as xSan and xGrid will pave the way for increased productivity and efficiency. Well, only if you have a G5 PowerBook I guess... :p

Didn't I tell you? Mine arrived yesterday. It's got an NV6800 in it, and I only have to wear the asbestos apron around half of the time. :cool:

Sounds like your best bet is just to buy an AMD FX-52 with a 9800XT graphics card - I hear they benchmark faster than the G6s already and can display 5 extra frames per second in UT2004 with everything turned on. Now THAT'S the future of computing - none of this xSan crap... ;) :cool:

You're behind, man. You need the Athlon FX53, because it arbitrarily better. I mean, look at the number! It's one higher. How can you argue with that? Besides, why would I want anything elegant or quiet, when I could doulbe up purposes and have my computer be a space heater in the winter and a circulation fan in the summer? ;)

Zaty
Apr 21, 2004, 12:44 AM
but remember the bump in Nov 03 that brought the 12" to 1 GHz, the 15" to 1.25 GHz and the 17" to 1.33 GHz?

edit: oops i put the wrong date! It should be Sept 03. Now I see others have posted this..... sorry. :D

Actually, the specs you mentioned were correct as of Sept. 1, 03. My point is it doesn't make sense to say as of a particular date, the specs were like this compared to current line up when in fact on the day your span began, the models had been out already for 8 and 10 months respectively. Or as another poster said, a week ago the 12" was at 1 GHZ, today it's at 1.33, so that's a 33% increase in one week. :)

oingoboingo
Apr 21, 2004, 12:45 AM
Actually no, I asked what the G5 can do that the G4 1.5Ghz CANNOT. The G4 PowerBook is up to the task, you just want to save a minute or 2, hardly a basis for claiming the G4 is not up to the job, your just impatient ;)

Cmon man, a minute or 2?

<sigh> Ok I see where we're going here. Like I said originally, a G4 will of course be able to run the same applications a G5 can. They're both Macintoshes. They're both PowerPCs. You know you can install Mac OS X 10.1 on a PowerPC 604 system? I've done it on a PowerMac 7600/120. It was up to the task, for sure. It ran everything I asked of it. But that would be missing the point entirely. It's a question of speed.

You may not mind waiting 4 minutes for a CPU-bound job to finish when you could have only waited 3 minutes. You might not mind that when you run the same calculation or the same job type several times over the course of the week, it adds up to an hour or two of saved time...or more. Maybe you just like the waiting time so you can relax and read the newspaper? Maybe you just don't perform any type of complex computation at all, and a G4 PowerBook is already fast enough for everything you need it to do. I don't know. But if you're happy with the performance of a G4 PowerBook, that's great. You will find a fantastic range of Macintosh G4-based portables over at www.apple.com/store.

However, your expectations are not shared by everyone. People want to run heavy CPU-bound tasks on a notebook. They want the jobs to run quickly. They want it to finish in 3 minutes what used to take 4 minutes. They want their visions realised in now-time, not in 2 minute's time. They appreciate the hours a week, days a month, or weeks a year that these time savings add up to. Yes...some people are impatient. They don't like sitting around waiting for a computer to analyse their images, add video effects to their film, compile their source code, find their DNA sequence, or render their 3D animation. For these people, a 1.5GHz PowerBook G4 may not be up to the task. End of story.

Seriously...nowhere else on the web except in Mac-land will you find a tech community so dedicated to down-managing and containing the expectations of its members based on its own limited range of experiences.

OVERHEARD IN THE TOYOTA OWNER'S FORUM
Person 1: "Well I love my Toyota Corolla. I use it to drive to the grocery store and take the kids to school. It's great for that!"
Person 2: "Hmmm...that's nice for you, but I need something bigger. I tow a boat on the weekends and go off-road a little camping, and I don't think the Corolla will cut it. Maybe something with a little more muscle...maybe a V8 LandCruiser"
Person 1: <foaming at the mouth for effect> "You're WRONG!!!!! Believe me, I love the Corolla and it's enough for ANYTHING!!!!. You ungrateful FESTERING BABOON!!!! You don't NEED anything bigger. All you do is COMPLAIN. If there's one person who understands your driving needs better than you, it's ME!!!!! I should stick my hand up your butt and use you for a COMPLAINING SULKING HAND PUPPET for mentioning the V8 LandCruiser"

aavatsma
Apr 21, 2004, 12:50 AM
Lets compare the latest G4 1.5Ghz machine and a high end Intel PC. We will go ahead and note the Intel based system is faster in the notebook, matter of fact we will directly compare it to a dragster, full ethano,l fully bored out speed demon from hell. Then we will call the G4 1.5Ghz a Porsche, not the fastest on the block but high performance and tuned.

The dragster shoots off at blinding speeds (and high noise levels mind you) for a short amount of time then it either runs out of gas or comes to a crashing stop. Intel chips go fast but since Windows is the driver it will only perform well for a short amount of time before the system becomes unstable or just flat out crashes, losing work in the progress and taking MORE time then it should. Windows is the worst driver in the world and thinks riding up on the curbs is ok, we can patch them if they break!

The Porsche takes off itself, takes everything you throw at it and keeps it up FAR longer then the dragster, has very little chance of crashing (due to the speed being slower) and is made for more heavy duty driving. The G4 also is a very efficient chip, it takes anything you throw at it and keeps on going, rarely does it crash because inside the Porsche driving is OS X, the best driver in the world, and rarely does he screw up. He has experience, know-how, insane amounts of skills.

So the question is before you, which driver do you want? Which car is going to be the better in the longhaul? Are you really saving that much time with a Pentium based PC with all the restarts, crashes, security flaws, etc etc etc, or are you better off waiting an extra few seconds and running flawlessly?

So basically, the powerbook line is not needed? Anything that can run osX and doesnt crash is more than good enough for anyone who doesnt want wintel? Who are you to decide that the current speed of a computer is enough for everyone?

Moving the powermac to g5 was a big mistake, because the g4 was a perfectly good chip and a lot cheaper. Actually, I dont think the g5 even exists. Its still just a g4, but it is and has always been so fast that noone is noticing the difference. Its all in our minds.

I wish apple would hire you as chief of development.
Faster powerbooks? nah, not needed. Evolving the os? nah, its perfect right now.

My bitchin has very little to do with apple, and very much to do with you telling me what i could use, and what i couldnt use.

thatwendigo
Apr 21, 2004, 01:12 AM
You may not mind waiting 4 minutes for a CPU-bound job to finish when you could have only waited 3 minutes...I don't know. But if you're happy with the performance of a G4 PowerBook, that's great.

You're right about a few things: One, I don't mind a slight wait, and two, the G4 already does most of what I need to do.

However, your expectations are not shared by everyone. People want to run heavy CPU-bound tasks on a notebook. They want the jobs to run quickly. They want it to finish in 3 minutes what used to take 4 minutes. They want their visions realised in now-time, not in 2 minute's time. They appreciate the hours a week, days a month, or weeks a year that these time savings add up to. Yes...some people are impatient. They don't like sitting around waiting for a computer to analyse their images, add video effects to their film, compile their source code, find their DNA sequence, or render their 3D animation. For these people, a 1.5GHz PowerBook G4 may not be up to the task. End of story.

Then, as I already said, they need to take some advice from the Dread Pirate Roberts. No computer that is available to professionals today does the kinds of things you're talking about without a wait. Nothing is going to be fast enough for them, and their imaptience is a source of needless frustration for them. They're probably the same people who cut others off in traffic all the time, because getting to the stoplight first is so important. :rolleyes:

Seriously...nowhere else on the web except in Mac-land will you find a tech community so dedicated to down-managing and containing the expectations of its members based on its own limited range of experiences.

Maybe you should turn that around. Perhaps there's nowhere else on the web that you'll find a community that will accept the reality of the market quite so readily. You're perfectly free to go buy something else, we just happen to like our nice, comfortable, and much more elegantly styled machines.

OVERHEARD IN THE TOYOTA OWNER'S FORUM.....COMPLAINING SULKING HAND PUPPET for mentioning the V8 LandCruiser"

This is a terrible comparison, because the difference between a Corolla and a Landcruiser is much more simple than the one between a G5 desktop and a portable.

thatwendigo
Apr 21, 2004, 01:15 AM
Moving the powermac to g5 was a big mistake, because the g4 was a perfectly good chip and a lot cheaper. Actually, I dont think the g5 even exists. Its still just a g4, but it is and has always been so fast that noone is noticing the difference. Its all in our minds.

Actually, the rumors say that the G4 was more expensive per unit, and I believe it. The G5 is a better chip, overall, and you're not going to find many people disagreeing with that around here. However, a place it's not a good solution is in a laptop. One reason the G5 is so fast is its incredible bus speed, which will roast a lap pretty quickly.

I wish apple would hire you as chief of development.
Faster powerbooks? nah, not needed. Evolving the os? nah, its perfect right now.

Riiight. Because what we said had anything to do with not advancing the line, instead of telling people to calm down and give Apple at least as much time as it took to get the G4 in a laptop? :rolleyes:

My bitchin has very little to do with apple, and very much to do with you telling me what i could use, and what i couldnt use.

Sounds to me like a lack of reading comprehension is the main culprit.

oingoboingo
Apr 21, 2004, 01:43 AM
Maybe you should turn that around. Perhaps there's nowhere else on the web that you'll find a community that will accept the reality of the market quite so readily.

I have printed this line out, and currently have it blu-tacked above my monitor. Every time I look at it, I giggle. Thanks for the laugh thatwendigo :)

thatwendigo
Apr 21, 2004, 01:52 AM
I have printed this line out, and currently have it blu-tacked above my monitor. Every time I look at it, I giggle. Thanks for the laugh thatwendigo :)

While I suspect that's deragatory, I'll take it as a compliment. Nothing like making other's laugh. :cool:

Incidentally, I didn't honestly believe that when I said it. Mac users, or at least a lot of them around here, seem to have gotten pretty whiny of late. Those of us who understand things tend to be either more accepting, or at least better able to phrase their disagreement.

thatwendigo
Apr 21, 2004, 02:03 AM
Josh_m and oingoboing: Thanks for the informative posts.

Which leads to one underlying question: Do you think Apple could put a G5 in a laptop similar to their current offerings today or are they deliberately NOT doing so for other reasons? (Explain the "other reasons" if possible.)

You may begin...

;)


Squire

My list:
1) Heat - Clock for clock, the G5 is generally a better performer than the G4, but at the expense of a greater heat profile. This is less of an issue in the 970fx than it was in the original chips, but is still something to be thoght about. On top of that, one of the main reasons that the overal systems are faster is the increased interconnect between systems - namely, the high-speed system bus and RAM banks that are fully drawn upon. Because of the problem with moving power across thin, imperfect materials over longer distances than in a chip, the bus is likely to be one off the largest factors in the delay. Add to this a new, hotter, faster ASIC, and you've got quite the predicament.
2) Battery Draw - It's not just that the system is going to be hotter, overall, but also that the heat has to come from somewhere. For those who haven't really considered it, the reason that computers get hot is that a lot of electricity is flowing through some pretty tiny pathways. That puts off radiant heat, but also means that the whole system is going to be hungrier and need more to power it just to keep the same battery life.
3) Interconnect Speeds - The bus needs to be fast to keep a G5 performing, or else you're just not going to see the same performance as in the desktops. Likewise, the discs and RAM need to be as high-end as possible, in order to keep the processor from being choked off. That means its likely 7200 RPM drives (or at least 5400), PC 3200 SO-DIMMs, and the fastest optical drive you can cram in a laptop case will be needed to keep up performance that would be noticeably better than the G4.
4) Interface Issues - There is no G5 laptop motherboard to base this off of, unlike the PowerBook bumps with the G4. They're not pin-compatible or even using the same foundational elements, so a whole new design that somehow overcomes the above issues is going to be needed.
5) Supply - The 970fx is reported to be having issues with being delivered in quantity. As such, existing products will almost certainly be receiving them first.

oingoboingo
Apr 21, 2004, 02:14 AM
While I suspect that's deragatory, I'll take it as a compliment. Nothing like making other's laugh. :cool:

Incidentally, I didn't honestly believe that when I said it. Mac users, or at least a lot of them around here, seem to have gotten pretty whiny of late. Those of us who understand things tend to be either more accepting, or at least better able to phrase their disagreement.

If you check some of the other posts I've made to today, I've been trying very hard not to be whiny for the sake of being whiny, (eg: "APPLE SUCKS!! WHERE IS THE G5 POWERBOOK!?!?!?! G4 SUCKS!!!! DELL R0X0R5!!!") because you are right, there is a lot of that around.

I've said this so many times today that I'll be repeating it in my sleep tonight for sure, but I've never said the G4 PowerBook updates were bad. In fact, for example I think Apple has done an excellent job with the new 1.33GHz 12" PowerBook...an extra 33% core clock speed, 64MB VRAM, 60GB standard HDD, AirPort Extreme included, and (in Australia) something like a AU $600 price drop (including the APX card). Excellent work, Apple. Check my posting history if you like. The thread you came in on was about something different.

What I was arguing against is a definite notion from some posters here that the current lineup should be good enough for everybody, and if they don't like it, they can leave/buy a Dell/eat their own faeces. Simply put, these 1.5GHz PowerBooks aren't going to be fast enough for some types of heavy users. And on top of that, a response of "well just wait another couple of minutes for the job to run" isn't really a helpful one...if we all could wait "just a few more minutes", then we wouldn't have microwaves, jet planes, or freeways. If people are happy with their current Macs, or with the new PowerBooks, then really, honestly, I'm happy for you. But there are some users here who will be much better served by the upcoming PowerBook G5s, and they are going to really improve their producivity over and above the current G4s.

What I don't then want to have is someone else telling me (or telling someone else) that "a G4 will be good enough for anything, and good enough for you", because a) it's incredibly arrogant and downright wrong, and b) no different to people saying "all G4 PowerBooks are too slow, nothing is worth considering until the G5 PowerBook". Different users, different needs.

aswitcher
Apr 21, 2004, 03:16 AM
Lets say Apple gets over all the G5PB hurdles and gets this baby out.

What's it going to cost? I am not convinced it will be at the same price point as the G4. I think it will come out initially as an additional line for "super users" and be priced some hundreds of US dollasr higher for the grunt, new screen etc.

Also it maybe only initially be a 17. I could see the 12" taking a far bit longer to fix.

I know this is going against precident (as far as I know)...

oingoboingo
Apr 21, 2004, 03:58 AM
Lets say Apple gets over all the G5PB hurdles and gets this baby out.

What's it going to cost? I am not convinced it will be at the same price point as the G4. I think it will come out initially as an additional line for "super users" and be priced some hundreds of US dollasr higher for the grunt, new screen etc.

Also it maybe only initially be a 17. I could see the 12" taking a far bit longer to fix.

I know this is going against precident (as far as I know)...

OK, let's launch into rampant speculation mode. My guess is that for the next revision at least, the 12" PowerBook stays with a G4 (maybe the 1.5GHz 7447A), and the 15" and 17" PowerBooks are the ones which get the G5s first.

I'm not so sure about the pricing necessarily increasing though...I think the G5s may actually be cheaper to buy than the G4s, and remember that when the PowerMac G5s were introduced, they were at similar price points to the outgoing PowerMac G4s.

powerbook4me
Apr 21, 2004, 04:00 AM
Why does it have to be a G5 going into the next update?

What if they came up with a totally new one for portability and power concerns?

aswitcher
Apr 21, 2004, 04:28 AM
I'm not so sure about the pricing necessarily increasing though...I think the G5s may actually be cheaper to buy than the G4s, and remember that when the PowerMac G5s were introduced, they were at similar price points to the outgoing PowerMac G4s.

Ok speculation it is :D

Sure, but the powerbooks face potentially expensive new design issues around cooling. I understand that they are even considering rather revolutionary liquid cooling. I hope they don't try anything too revolutionary.

Also the battery life might be an issue given the clockspeed, making them turn to more expensive technologies to maintain mobile endurance. Not sure about this, but if it also has to run the possible liquid cooling...

Then there is the high likelyhood of a screen upgrade, likely to accommodate HDTV on the 17, and generally catchup to the high end pc notebook market. Thats not cheap.

We also have 7200rpm drives, DVD R/W and possibly 4 not 2 slots for ram (being G5).

It all adds up, let alone the R&D costs...

Anyway, I wouldn't be too surprised if the G5 first appeared but they kept up sales of the 12 and maybe the 15 combo G4 for those who need/want the features and don't want/can't afford a G5

Squire
Apr 21, 2004, 04:50 AM
Lets say Apple gets over all the G5PB hurdles and gets this baby out.

What's it going to cost? I am not convinced it will be at the same price point as the G4. I think it will come out initially as an additional line for "super users" and be priced some hundreds of US dollasr higher for the grunt, new screen etc.

Also it maybe only initially be a 17. I could see the 12" taking a far bit longer to fix.

I know this is going against precident (as far as I know)...

I couldn't agree more- especially with your idea (in your later post) of Apple want to recoup some R&D expenses. We'll probably see the G5 in the 17" and possibly the 15" model. The 12" model will be a tougher nut to crack, I think. Which brings me to the next question...


Why does it have to be a G5 going into the next update?

What if they came up with a totally new one for portability and power concerns?

What happened to the successor to the G3? Wasn't it also supposed to be a wicked chip made specifically for the mobile market? I never hear people refer to that anymore. Has anyone heard anything about it? (Was it the G3 with Altivec or am I getting confused with another chip?)

Squire

pigwin32
Apr 21, 2004, 05:37 AM
Actually no, I asked what the G5 can do that the G4 1.5Ghz CANNOT. The G4 PowerBook is up to the task, you just want to save a minute or 2, hardly a basis for claiming the G4 is not up to the job, your just impatient ;)

Cmon man, a minute or 2?
I'm am so on side with oingo on this, it's almost like the days when a pub full of Kiwis would cheer Australia against the common enemy South Africa.

Reminiscing aside, are you serious, you don't mind waiting? Do you have children? My spare time is almost non-existent without having to wait for my computer to get stuff done. Of course if I was attempting to do anything serious I wouldn't be spending my time here but you know, it's PB update season so WTF.

Specifically a G5 can take advantage of the tuning that Apple is going to apply to it's operating system and applications. For a user like myself who upgrades infrequently I want my next laptop to be current for as long as possible.

I typically do a variety of stuff on my TiBook 667, iPhoto, iMovie, Mail.app, some web development. Upgrading to an AlBook 1.5 would certainly improve the processing of raw image files from my Canon camera and I did consider the update because having to wait *is* really annoying. Especially if I want to tweak any of the settings and reprocess an image, at the moment it's too slow to be practical. A new G4 PB would be a quick fix for today's problem (and yes portability is important to me, I'm not considering a desktop). But my TiBook is still sufficient for most of what I do so I can handle the wait for a G5 PB. In fact my TiBook has the same screen as the new PBs which was one of my beefs with the new machines, a higher res screen is going to be great for image processing.

I don't see the whining so much, I see Apple apologists making excuses for what I consider to be a fairly average refresh. I'm more interested in the G5 release, when it will occur, what it will contain, whether chasingapple (http://forums.macrumors.com/member.php?userid=31125) really is Greg Joswiak, it's about looking for information in a stream of bits.

dernhelm
Apr 21, 2004, 05:59 AM
My list:
1) Heat - Clock for clock, the G5 is generally a better performer than the G4, but at the expense of a greater heat profile.


Yes, a G5 running at 2+GHz would cast a pretty big heat dissipation problem, but would a G5 running at 1.2? And don't think for one moment that a 1.2GHz G5 Powerbook wouldn't sell like hotcakes.


3) Interconnect Speeds - ... its likely 7200 RPM drives (or at least 5400), PC 3200 SO-DIMMs, and the fastest optical drive you can cram in a laptop case will be needed to keep up performance that would be noticeably better than the G4.


Do you think anyone notices the difference between a 1.33 GHz chip and a 1.5GHz chip? Yet Apple still continues to push out incremental updates even though you don't get noticably better performance. Again a 64 bit G5 powerbook would sell itself - it wouldn't have to be orders of magnitudes faster than the current offerings in order to get people to buy it.


4) Interface Issues - There is no G5 laptop motherboard to base this off of, unlike the PowerBook bumps with the G4. They're not pin-compatible or even using the same foundational elements, so a whole new design that somehow overcomes the above issues is going to be needed.

5) Supply - The 970fx is reported to be having issues with being delivered in quantity. As such, existing products will almost certainly be receiving them first.


Here we agree, this is the real issue - not enough 90nm chips to go around anyway, and that small little niggling issue of redesigning the entire interior of your machine around the new processor. Apple does not have unlimited engineering bandwidth, and they cannot simply "put every available engineer" on a single problem. It will take them some time to completely redesign the powerbook internals (and while they are at it, I'm sure they will redesign the externals as well - form following function).

eSnow
Apr 21, 2004, 06:44 AM
There are more factors in an Apple notebook then just the CPU people, you sound like a bunch of PC overclocking / hardware swapping freaks.


Thanks for the insult.
Especially since you target it at people, who presumably because of the fact that they are professionals working in advanced fields, know perfectly well the difference between Windows, Unix et al.

If you believe iLife and form Factor are enough to convince me that a sub-standard consumer-laptop (G4 Powerbook) stacks up against a semi-current Centrino, think again.


Now I would love for someone to actually show/tell me exactly what that G4 1.5Ghz machine WILL NOT do for them that ONLY a G5 would?

Im waiting...

In my case - serious Java development. I semi-switched to wintel (cheap Centrino) because none of Apples notebooks even came close to the performance needed. Pentium M (and likely G5) do.

I would buy a 2" 2Ghz G5 PowerBook in an instant, but I have to get my work done, not admire Ive's industrial design a whole day.

eSnow
Apr 21, 2004, 07:06 AM
One reason the G5 is so fast is its incredible bus speed, which will roast a lap pretty quickly.

And you know this because...?

What I am witnessing was two stages of Apple-apologies over the last months:

1) The 970 cannot go into a laptop. Come on look at those increadible heat sinks in the towers. 8 Fans! Much too hot.

Then the 970FX appeared on the landscape, featuring power characteristics roughly equal to or less than the now-released 7447A (lower consumption for same clock speed than the G4s, higher for faster speeds). So, obviously the point was moot, and the apologists went to stage 2:

2) It's the chipset, dummy! (most people don't even know which part of the chipset). Much too hot, will melt down the whole laptop!

This is still thrown around simply because noone (incl. me) knows anything about the power requirements of the current northbridge chip. It used to be cooled with a heat pipe in the towers, but we know nothing about where it stands now (has it moved to a smaller process as well?). Very convenient.

I challenge you: If you say the chipset is running too hot, post one factual link to prove it.
You can't? Thought so, the chipset-myth is based on believe.

To those pointing to the XServe for an example why the current chips can't go into a laptop: there were XServes G4 - and the same chips went into the PowerBooks only slightly later.

oingoboingo
Apr 21, 2004, 08:05 AM
And you know this because...?

What I am witnessing was two stages of Apple-apologies over the last months: <snip>



Please don't forget the third stage also: "You don't need the power of a G5 in a notebook. The G4 is fine for everything."

eSnow
Apr 21, 2004, 08:24 AM
Please don't forget the third stage also: "You don't need the power of a G5 in a notebook. The G4 is fine for everything."

And of course stage 4 (pissed):
- So, go ahead, buy your P.O.S Dell, good riddance, we don't need you PC-sucking MS slave anyways. We have style - and iApps!

SiliconAddict
Apr 21, 2004, 09:43 AM
It's going to be funny as hell when Apple does come out with a G5 PowerBook which will in all likeliness blow away the G4. And the thread with the title:

Apple Releases 17" PowerBook G5

will have everyone oooing and awing the benchmarks.

I will be sure to post a link to this thread for all those who currently are bitching about how a G5 is unnecessary, overkill, a waste, and how the G4 is good enough for everyone.

Its amazes me how full of crap some people are. Do you hear ANYONE complaining, well other then a small minority, about PowerMac G5's? No it's like: "Look my PowerMac is as fast as all those PC's out there!" (At least that was true 6 months ago.) But you flip over to the PowerBook and its: "Who needs a G5"
Bunch of hypocrites. You (Please note you is not intended to be all inclusive considering I know there are more then a few moderate Mac users out there.) twist, alter, distort, and filter only the fact that you want to see.

Understand this. Good enough is a BS excuse. Are you suggesting that Apple can dictate what I consider good enough?!?! Or are YOU trying to dictate what I consider good enough. How very Orwellian of you. I thought it was think different not think conformist?
Value for the system is where it's at. When one can get a PC laptop priced out the same (Maybe a bit more, maybe a bit less.) and get BETTER performance out of that laptop for aprox the same price the question will always be brought up: Is the Mac worth the price?

As stated by several others before, yes the sum total of a systems parts need to be taken into consideration: OS, hardware, customer support, system quality, how well the system ages, etc. But consider that hardware affects all other parts of a system. Having the most wonderful OS on the planet means exactly squat if you have a system that isn't getting the job done. The overall computer experience is diminished. And maybe its just me but walking into the Apple store and comparing the speed of OS X on a G5 and on a 17" PowerBook with a 1.33Ghz G4 the OS feels snappier on the G5. Apps open a little faster. Things just get done faster which in turn makes the OS X experience better. That is the overall reason for faster hardware. It’s the user experience that is core here. IMHO getting things done faster and being productive is a byproduct.
And frankly this BS about it doesn't matter if I get things done in 1 minute vs. 2 minutes is a load so high I could start selling it to fertilizing producers to build my own G5 PowerBook. Another excuse. Another reason. This is the exact same crap that was heard time and again for the PowerMac line pre-G5. Unfortunately it has now officially trickled down to the PowerBook.
This is why I believe Apple has probably been working on the G5 for the PowerBook for a while. They had to realize that the G4 would only keep user satisfied for ONLY so long. We haven't hit the wall yet where the majority of users are balking at these speedbumps but if this thread is any indication it's starting. And it’s a pretty good bet that with these speed bumps will come only marginal increases in speed. As has been stated before ad nauseum the system bus or FSB is what is killing the PowerBook. Until something is done to rectify this situation, be it a G4 with a better FSB, a souped up G3, or a G5; you will, most likely, see a release pattern similar to the pre-G5 PowerMacs: Craptastic microspeedbumps that are touted by Mac zealots as good enough! WEEEEE!! Look ma! My shiny new PowerBooks is 7% faster then last years model and yet 30% slower then the average Pentium M laptop.
God I feel alive!!!!

SiliconAddict
Apr 21, 2004, 09:45 AM
er. Question. Would anyone actually turn down a PowerBook G5? :rolleyes:

SiliconAddict
Apr 21, 2004, 10:04 AM
The dragster shoots off at blinding speeds (and high noise levels mind you) for a short amount of time then it either runs out of gas or comes to a crashing stop. Intel chips go fast but since Windows is the driver it will only perform well for a short amount of time before the system becomes unstable or just flat out crashes, losing work in the progress and taking MORE time then it should. Windows is the worst driver in the world and thinks riding up on the curbs is ok, we can patch them if they break!


What a load of high yield crap.
:mad: Have you even USED Windows 2000 or XP?!?! Do you have even an ounce of data to backup your zealot comment?!! My Tosh laptop has been running XP for, crap I'm closing in on 1 year, FLAWLESSLY. NO viruses, NO adware, NO problems. If you are going to make such comments back them up with facts.
I have no problem with someone hacking on a platform. But don't spout out junk that was true 2 Window versions ago.

PS- My Windows 2003 home server has been up for 76 days now with zero downtime. Yep MS is a steaming POS. :rolleyes:

Spazmodius
Apr 21, 2004, 10:08 AM
er. Question. Would anyone actually turn down a PowerBook G5? :rolleyes:

Er, answer: NO! The ONLY reason I wait for Apple to release a portable with (hopefully) specs that justify the price is I find OSX to be a far superior product, both to any Windows variant and Linux.

If a duallie 2.0GHz G5 tower were someting I could work with, I'd buy it in a heartbeat. But, I repeat, I need a portable. I also need some power. The 1.5GHz PB certainly would be a big improvement over my current Ti667, but if I buy that now, I have to wait 2+ years for another portable due to budget constraints (so sayeth da boss).

It's a serious quandry. My employer is one of the few that lets us pick Mac or PC, and reasonably supports both. My job involves some heavy-duty image processing and analysis. Time is money. My current PB costs me time, and them money. I'm ready to buy a new book. They're ready for me to buy it. I want a Mac; them, they don't care as long as the work gets done. I think I've got 6-8 months, tops before my hand is forced and I have to get something. If G4 PBs are all that's available, Apple has lost a customer who wanted to stick with the Mac.

I'm tired of excuses. Oh, it's the fabs. Oh, it's the chipset. Supply is too low. The G4 is plenty good. Heat. Battery. Somehow, WinTel did the work necessary to make servicible and, most importantly, much faster laptops than what I can buy from Apple. Sorry, but sometimes speed really is important, it's not just "dick-measuring". I'm at the point where I have to say: Apple, no more excuses, no more delays. You give me what I need, or I have to go elsewhere. Simple as that. I'm not bashing. Hell, it bums me out. But that's the reality, and if tinfoil-hat wearing macoholics can't acknowledge this is a chronic problem and voice their concern to St. Jobs, rather than sucking his kneecaps every time he releases yet another 5% speed boost in six months like he's Moses coming down from the mountain, then, well, you get the market obscurity you deserve.

stockscalper
Apr 21, 2004, 10:08 AM
With the 128 graphics card, 5400 rpm hard drive and faster ram apps are going to feel much snappier on the new Powerbooks!

Mr. MacPhisto
Apr 21, 2004, 10:45 AM
It's going to be funny as hell when Apple does come out with a G5 PowerBook which will in all likeliness blow away the G4. And the thread with the title:

Apple Releases 17" PowerBook G5

will have everyone oooing and awing the benchmarks.

I will be sure to post a link to this thread for all those who currently are bitching about how a G5 is unnecessary, overkill, a waste, and how the G4 is good enough for everyone.

Its amazes me how full of crap some people are. Do you hear ANYONE complaining, well other then a small minority, about PowerMac G5's? No it's like: "Look my PowerMac is as fast as all those PC's out there!" (At least that was true 6 months ago.) But you flip over to the PowerBook and its: "Who needs a G5"
Bunch of hypocrites. You (Please note you is not intended to be all inclusive considering I know there are more then a few moderate Mac users out there.) twist, alter, distort, and filter only the fact that you want to see.

It all really depends on needs. There are some who really could use a G5 in a notebook. It is certainly a superior chip. I agree that a lot of people are overzealous in regards to these PowerBooks. I think it is a decent update, but nothing earth shattering. There are a lot of people who will give Apple every accolade for anything they put out. For me, these updates are immaterial. I've been running an iBook with a G3 for two years and have no intention of getting a new laptop because this iBook is more than adequate for what I do (email, internet, MS Office, iTunes, etc). However, if someone wanted to do more processor intensive things, a Pentium M laptop may be more sufficient - though you will pay as much or more if you want a PC laptop that is compact and somewhat reliable - and you'll likely be stuck with an inferior video card (IBM's only have Radeon 9000s with 32MB).

There are other factors. Cross platform benchmarks are not always accurate. The one advantage that Apple has, even with G4s that are truly inferior in many ways, is the OS. It's not just an ease of use factor, it is a stability factor. I've setup a PC/Mac system for a client that does video editing and animation. This setup includes both desktops and laptops. The PC desktops are custom built by me, the laptops are IBMs, due to reliability. It is true, out of the box the Pentium M (@ 1.6GHZ) is noticeably faster than the PowerBooks (@ 1.25GHZ) when doing processor intensive renders, etc. However, a month down the line the PowerBooks are faster than the Pentium M systems. Why? Windows, over time, clogs up. Even after I clean the PC systems up, they never are as good as when they are freshly loaded. I have to reload the PC systems (desktop and laptop) every two months to try to keep them efficient. That client has now decided to switch over completely to Mac by the end of the year. The processors are slower, but the OS isn't the dog that XP is. They can't run Linux because of the software they use and they've discovered that over the course of the year the Macs have much fewer problems and actually get more work done because OS X doesn't crash very often (only twice on 17 machines over the past year) and it doesn't clog up. Processor speed is meaningless if the machine is not functioning properly or is not working at an optimum level. So raw benchmarks or out of the box tests are not indicative of the real world. PCs make up a small percentage of the machines I've installed for a reason. My clients have switched over to Mac over the past two years because they lost days of work due to PC OS problems. The inferiority of the processor is immaterial to them because the Macs are actually more productive machines because of the lack of significant down time (oh yes, and their ability to sleep without crashing)

Understand this. Good enough is a BS excuse. Are you suggesting that Apple can dictate what I consider good enough?!?! Or are YOU trying to dictate what I consider good enough. How very Orwellian of you. I thought it was think different not think conformist?
Value for the system is where it's at. When one can get a PC laptop priced out the same (Maybe a bit more, maybe a bit less.) and get BETTER performance out of that laptop for aprox the same price the question will always be brought up: Is the Mac worth the price?

Yes, more than worth the price mainly due to the fact that the PC will not be so fast in a month. Out of the box it is lightning quick. After being used for a whole month, no matter how much maintenance you do, it slows down considerably. Just time the boot times and operations over the course of a month and you'll be startled to find out that speed goes down by 50% - and tendency to crash goes up.

As stated by several others before, yes the sum total of a systems parts need to be taken into consideration: OS, hardware, customer support, system quality, how well the system ages, etc. But consider that hardware affects all other parts of a system. Having the most wonderful OS on the planet means exactly squat if you have a system that isn't getting the job done. The overall computer experience is diminished. And maybe its just me but walking into the Apple store and comparing the speed of OS X on a G5 and on a 17" PowerBook with a 1.33Ghz G4 the OS feels snappier on the G5. Apps open a little faster. Things just get done faster which in turn makes the OS X experience better. That is the overall reason for faster hardware. It’s the user experience that is core here. IMHO getting things done faster and being productive is a byproduct.

This is true. The G5 is significantly better running OS X. But OS X is so far beyond Windows XP. The processor can become immaterial when an OS allows itself to become so clogged up that it takes a serious performance hit. The hardware is nice on the PC end, but Windows is a real killer. If you can do what you need to do on Linux then the PC is the best option, but if your decision lies between Windows and OS X, over time you will get more done on the G4, even though the Pentium M is a better, faster chip for most things (floating point stuff being an exception).

And frankly this BS about it doesn't matter if I get things done in 1 minute vs. 2 minutes is a load so high I could start selling it to fertilizing producers to build my own G5 PowerBook. Another excuse. Another reason. This is the exact same crap that was heard time and again for the PowerMac line pre-G5. Unfortunately it has now officially trickled down to the PowerBook.
This is why I believe Apple has probably been working on the G5 for the PowerBook for a while. They had to realize that the G4 would only keep user satisfied for ONLY so long. We haven't hit the wall yet where the majority of users are balking at these speedbumps but if this thread is any indication it's starting. And it’s a pretty good bet that with these speed bumps will come only marginal increases in speed. As has been stated before ad nauseum the system bus or FSB is what is killing the PowerBook. Until something is done to rectify this situation, be it a G4 with a better FSB, a souped up G3, or a G5; you will, most likely, see a release pattern similar to the pre-G5 PowerMacs: Craptastic microspeedbumps that are touted by Mac zealots as good enough! WEEEEE!! Look ma! My shiny new PowerBooks is 7% faster then last years model and yet 30% slower then the average Pentium M laptop.
God I feel alive!!!!

The time comparison, as I've said before, becomes irrelevant over several weeks of use. If you use a PC to get email, do calculations, render stuff, use the internet, type of documents, and if you download anything or install any programs on it, you're going to notice that that 30% speed difference gets smaller every week. Funny thing is that my iBook has only gotten faster with time. Granted, it's not a speed demon, but it seems that everything runs faster everytime I update OS X.

That all said, the G4 should only be a temporary solution. It was a great chip three years ago+ but is not great as is. It could be much better with some on onboard memory controller, 1MB L2 cache, and true DDR support with higher bus speeds. If Motorola can successfully transition to 90nm this summer, as scheduled, in Crolles then there may be life left, especially on the consumer end. Although the rumors of a dual core G4 with better bus support coming in the fall are intriguing, I'm not going to hold my breath.

Is the G4 sufficient? For now, it still is - but not due to Motorola's engineering. It is sufficient because the OS on the Mac is much better than Windows. Software bogs down the PC. Of course, it does on the Mac end too. Who knows how well the G4 would do on some apps if they were properly optimized instead of poorly ported. All that said, it is in Apple's best interest to get a G5 into the PowerBooks in the next revision. From my understanding, the biggest problem right now is not engineering and heat issues. Friends at IBM tell me it's the supply of 90nm 970FXs is very low, BUT that problem should be corrected by the end of summer.

Snowy_River
Apr 21, 2004, 12:38 PM
OK, let's launch into rampant speculation mode. My guess is that for the next revision at least, the 12" PowerBook stays with a G4 (maybe the 1.5GHz 7447A), and the 15" and 17" PowerBooks are the ones which get the G5s first.

I'm not so sure about the pricing necessarily increasing though...I think the G5s may actually be cheaper to buy than the G4s, and remember that when the PowerMac G5s were introduced, they were at similar price points to the outgoing PowerMac G4s.


I've said it before, and I'll say it again. If Apple can't put a G5 into the 12" I think it would be a foolish move for them to even keep it around. If people want a 12" G4 based laptop, the iBook is available...

MadMan
Apr 21, 2004, 01:29 PM
What a load of high yield crap.
<SNIP>
PS- My Windows 2003 home server has been up for 76 days now with zero downtime. Yep MS is a steaming POS. :rolleyes:

By that, you mean that you haven't applied any of MS's security patches released over the last 2 1/2 months? :rolleyes:

MM

thatwendigo
Apr 21, 2004, 01:41 PM
Simply put, these 1.5GHz PowerBooks aren't going to be fast enough for some types of heavy users. And on top of that, a response of "well just wait another couple of minutes for the job to run" isn't really a helpful one...if we all could wait "just a few more minutes", then we wouldn't have microwaves, jet planes, or freeways. If people are happy with their current Macs, or with the new PowerBooks, then really, honestly, I'm happy for you. But there are some users here who will be much better served by the upcoming PowerBook G5s, and they are going to really improve their producivity over and above the current G4s.

Simply put, not even the PowerBook G5s will be fast enough for some people, and they'lll find something to complain about the moment that specs are released, again when the actual machines are in their hands, and again when some PC laptop that's eight times the weight and as loud as a leaf blower manages to beat it in a rigged benchmark. I'm against a mindset, not reality. Yes, there are circumstances where faster machines would be better for applications (nearly all circumstances, actually), but the reality of it is that the G5 was never intended as a laptop chip. It's a modified server processor that was shoehorned into a desktop, and is not trying to be shoved even further down so that it fits in a portable.

Also, you're using a fallacious comparison. The microwave, jet planes, and highways all take time to create, and you can't just whine to rush them. In addition, they were created to fulfill needs that didn't really exist yet, especially in the case of the jet and the highway. People got along just fine without Messerschmits and the DoD-created transporation system, until someone commercialized them. The G5 laptops will be a redesign of existing systems that will give extra performance at a greater cost in technology.

Yes, a G5 running at 2+GHz would cast a pretty big heat dissipation problem, but would a G5 running at 1.2? And don't think for one moment that a 1.2GHz G5 Powerbook wouldn't sell like hotcakes.

I do, because it would be a step backwards. They'd lose out to professionals, who would probably know that a 1.5 G4 can beat a 1.2 G5, and consumers would see the numerical difference. Clock-for-clock, the G5 is better, but not that much better, and certainly not in an environment where they might end up dropping the bus down to save on heat.

Do you think anyone notices the difference between a 1.33 GHz chip and a 1.5GHz chip? Yet Apple still continues to push out incremental updates even though you don't get noticably better performance. Again a 64 bit G5 powerbook would sell itself - it wouldn't have to be orders of magnitudes faster than the current offerings in order to get people to buy it.

Actually, yes, I do think people notice the difference, especially when there's a major susbsystem upgrade like there has been in the latest revision. They moved up the hard drives and graphics cards both, factors which have time and time again shown not only real world improvement, but also subjective improvement in usage.

Here we agree, this is the real issue - not enough 90nm chips to go around anyway, and that small little niggling issue of redesigning the entire interior of your machine around the new processor. Apple does not have unlimited engineering bandwidth, and they cannot simply "put every available engineer" on a single problem. It will take them some time to completely redesign the powerbook internals (and while they are at it, I'm sure they will redesign the externals as well - form following function).

Yep.

If you believe iLife and form Factor are enough to convince me that a sub-standard consumer-laptop (G4 Powerbook) stacks up against a semi-current Centrino, think again.

Then. Don't. Buy. One.

Jesus... :rolleyes:

And you know this because...?

Oh, I don't know. Maybe it's because of that 600 watt PSU that sits inside the case? Since we know the voltage of the processors (around 50w each for the 970 at 2.0ghz), and can find the power draw of the graphics cards (approximately 60-75w, from the review of the NV6800), and we know that hard drives don't chew all that much power up... Where else is that power going, snow? Mind telling me that?

I don't know this, but it's reasoned speculation.

Then the 970FX appeared on the landscape, featuring power characteristics roughly equal to or less than the now-released 7447A (lower consumption for same clock speed than the G4s, higher for faster speeds). So, obviously the point was moot,

Yes, when the 970fx showed up, "apologists" moved on to looking at the other systems. However, some of us had been worried about those all along, and had never stopped their insistence that certain factors would be more difficult to place in a laptop. Find me a PC laptop that's an inch thick and running an 800mhz bus, but also as quiet as Apple's PowerBooks.

This is still thrown around simply because noone (incl. me) knows anything about the power requirements of the current northbridge chip. It used to be cooled with a heat pipe in the towers, but we know nothing about where it stands now (has it moved to a smaller process as well?). Very convenient.

:rolleyes:

Riiiight. So jumping from 167mhz to 800+mhz isn't going to increase the heat of an interconnect, let alone the Northbridge chips? I'm not sure what world you live in, snow, but I ran all of this past a couple of actual engineers that I know. According to them, what I say makes sense in the sense of physics, but admittedly, they're not on the Apple R&D team.

You can't? Thought so, the chipset-myth is based on believe.

So is anything you say, so I don't get where you're coming off so high and mighty, especially since you haven't offered anything more than "apologist" this and "it's been done before" that, with a healthy sprinkling of implied "man, you guys are stupid." As such, I'd appreciate you showing us some figures that say the components are all cool enough to fit.

You can't? That's what I thought. :rolleyes:

Please don't forget the third stage also: "You don't need the power of a G5 in a notebook. The G4 is fine for everything."

I never said that, and I don't really recall seeing anyone else say that it works for everything. Obviously, the G5 does outperform the G4 in adesktop environment, but that doesn't mean that the same will hold true in the limited surrounds of a laptop.

And with that, I'm stopping for now. Silicon's gone over the edge. :p