X-Book, world's most powerful notebook.

[peter2002]

I am shopping around for a new notebook. Came across this last night. It is called the Northgate X-Book (http://www.northgate.com/content/products/notebook_desktops/xnotebook/). It has up to a 2.8 Ghz P4. That is 2.0 Ghz faster than the PowerBook. Now that is some freakin' power.

X-Book is a minimum 2-3.5 times faster. Since it is faster, I don't need a 5 hour battery when I can get the job done in 2 hours. I would rather spend my time to kick back and read a book, listen to music, or spend time with my family.

Apple better get its a** in gear soon.

Peter

[shadowfax]

right.... who would want a 2 inch thick notebook with a desktop CPU in it? that thing's battery probably lasts 45 minutes tops. that's worthless. and it may be 2 GHz "faster," but we all know that means little or nothing. the 2.8 is cutting edge desktop for intel... of course it's faster than a legitimate laptop pocessor... but not by much, and certainly, that 2.8 GHz will not last too long; it has to kick off some heat.

don't get fooled by fake laptop manufacturers. they are trying to sell you desktop computers in small boxes, without actually giving you any of the advantages of portability. that laptop is for people who only use their laptops at a few different home/work places, and only with KVM switches at that. it is nothing that apple is trying to compete with, because frankly, the powerbook is much much more professional.

[peter2002]

It still sounds like a good deal to me. X-Book is 4X times faster than a PowerBook and $500 cheaper and it has 266 DDR Ram.

Battery life isn't really important because 99% of people run their notebook off of A/C, not battery. If you do, you can run this up to 2 hours on a battery. Still not bad.

All this talk about editing a movie while flying coast to coast is bunk. Trying to do that while flying on a major and they will think you are a terrorist. Besides the jets now have A/C jacks in first class.

And in real life the PowerBook doesn't get 5 hours of battery life. That is just more Apple hype. In real life you may get 3 hours, unless your work on something disk intensive like video or audio, you can cut that down to 2 hours.

Peter

[Falleron]

I doubt that this laptop advert is correct. There is no way a current desktop cpu is used in the laptop (too much heat). It also cant be a Mobile version because they have not been released at this speed. Therefore, I think it is a miss-print! As for battery life, you'll be lucky if it lasts an hour!

NB. Sorry, but dont give that rubbish about it being 4X quicker!! Thats absolute rubbish! Mhz is a very poor rating!

[peter2002]

No, all the major PC makers are using desktop P4 CPUs in their notebooks because the chip is about $500 less than the P4M. The only drawback is that these notebooks weight about 9 pounds and only get about 90 minutes of battery life. But for people that want all the power you can get, they are willing to make the sacrifice.

The 2.8 Ghz P4 is a new CPU. Intel released it Tuesday.

Peter

[Falleron]

Originally posted by peter2002
No, all the major PC makers are using desktop P4 CPUs in their notebooks because the chip is about $500 less than the P4M. The only drawback is that these notebooks weight about 9 pounds and only get about 90 minutes of battery life. But for people that want all the power you can get, they are willing to make the sacrifice.

The 2.8 Ghz P4 is a new CPU. Intel released it Tuesday.

Peter
Ok, I did not know that. However, I still stick to my point about it not being 4X faster.

[iJon]

Originally posted by peter2002
It still sounds like a good deal to me. X-Book is 4X times faster than a PowerBook and $500 cheaper and it has 266 DDR Ram.

Battery life isn't really important because 99% of people run their notebook off of A/C, not battery. If you do, you can run this up to 2 hours on a battery. Still not bad.

All this talk about editing a movie while flying coast to coast is bunk. Trying to do that while flying on a major and they will think you are a terrorist. Besides the jets now have A/C jacks in first class.

Peter
Ok, so it is 4x faster than the PowerBook. 4x faster in what. You just can't say it is 4x faster. And saying that no one runs there laptop of battery, thats insane. thats the whole damn reason why i have a powerbook, so i can take it with to places where I can't plug it in. Whatever the battery life on that thing is I would knock off and hour and you would get really. Editing movies is a terrorist thing, right. Plus not everyone flies first class. Can that X-Book run iCal, iTunes, iMovie, iPhoto, Final Cut Pro, DVD Studio Pro, and everything else without crashing. I think not. Next time think of something to back up your problem with Apple. To me it sounds like you don't know what your talking about and I think everyone else on this server would agree.

iJon

[Rajj]

Originally posted by peter2002


Battery life isn't really important because 99% of people run their notebook off of A/C, not battery. If you do, you can run this up to 2 hours on a battery. Still not bad.

All this talk about editing a movie while flying coast to coast is bunk. Trying to do that while flying on a major and they will think you are a terrorist. Besides the jets now have A/C jacks in first class.

Peter

Speak for yourself my friend:p , I fly all the time,
and some airlines don't have ac jacks in planes at all!!:mad: and I do edit stuff on my powerbook coast to coast and I watch DVD's also, so let's see if your X-Book can make it on battery power only running a DVD, flying from ORD to LAS:p

[estevan2737]

Of course not and there is it's primary downfall.

I don't care if its 4x times faster (of course it really isn't) if it doesn't run OS X, I and I suspect most of the people here wouldn't want it.

Enjoy your new laptop.

[spinner]

At least you will be able to cook breakfast where ever you find outlet. ;)

A 2 hour battery life, maybe in sleep mode. :rolleyes: You will be lucky to get 45 min to an hour tops. Desktop P4 processors don't offer that much more power over the mobiles for all of the extra battery drain.

It weighs 9 POUNDS. :eek: No need to work out after a long day of lugging a brick around, you'll have Arnold Schwartzenegger size muscles without the the gym membership.

[Billy_ca]

Battery life isn't really important because 99% of people run their notebook off of A/C, not battery.

99% of people run their notebook off of A/C, not battery, because battery life is so crappy.

[medea]

Well the only thing for me is, I don't buy apple hardware just for it's specs, I want to run an apple OS.....will that thing run OS X or are you gonna be booting into Linux (in which case you wouldnt be doing video editing coast to coast even if you wanted to) or Windohs. when is the power trip gonna end!?!:eek:

[Postal]

The X-Book is a very different breed of animal than the Powerbook G4. As others have said before, it's a "desktop replacement" laptop; it's designed to offer power at all costs and just coincidentally be portable... if only just. :)

The Powerbook G4 is a performance system, but it's obviously designed with portability more in mind. It's one inch thick, 5.5 pounds (more than a third lighter!) and generally designed to be more easily moved.

[peter2002]

It weighs 9 POUNDS. No need to work out after a long day of lugging a brick around, you'll have Arnold Schwartzenegger size muscles without the the gym membership.

You must be a "puny-man" if you can't handle 9 lbs. That is probably less than the weight of your lunch at McDs. ;)

Peter

[iJon]

Originally posted by peter2002
It weighs 9 POUNDS. No need to work out after a long day of lugging a brick around, you'll have Arnold Schwartzenegger size muscles without the the gym membership.

You must be a "puny-man" if you can't handle 9 lbs. That is probably less than the weight of your lunch at McDs. ;)

Peter
Hey Peter,
Stop being to stupid. Apparently you know nothing about computers and are just looking to start an arguement on a Mac site. If you want that crap x-book no one is stopping you. But since you know nothing about computers you cant put up a good arguement. Give us three good reasons why to pick that computer and compare them to a mac then come and give us an arguement.

iJon

[davidc2182]

the northgate all in one is pretty cool looking for a pee cee of course, however the OS aside its a very cool looking machine very tech looking, in my opinion the imac flat panel is cool looking and all, but it does not give off an ora of seriousness, it looks like my luxo lamp :( but i'd still get one in a heart beat over any pee cee, i want my cube tho :) dual ghz cube upgrade with maximum ram and an upgraded slot loading dvd cdrw combo drive the only problem is no ddr ram, and system bus speed is stuck, and the graphix card can only be upgraded so far, but the pee cee version of a classic imac looks cool, has usb 2.0 firewire combo drive, ddr ram, p4 blech, and a tv tuner built in so you can capture ur fav shows which i like, i really want a detachable lcd screen that is connected to the computer via some wireless standard and will allow me to surf the internet, play games, etc anywhere in the room and has a touch screen!

[peter2002]

Well, you don't have to be a computer genius or a Phd to figure this one out. Any bubble boy can understand this math.

1. X-Book is a minimum 2-3.5 times faster. Since it is faster, I don't need a 5 hour battery when I can get the job done in 2 hours. I would rather spend my time to kick back and read a book, listen to music, or spend time with my family.

2. X-Book is $500-$1,500 cheaper depending on configurations.

3. X-Book can burn DVDs.

4. X-Book runs KaZaA, Direct Connect, iMesh, Win MX. PowerBook can't unless you pay $200 to run one of those slow, buggy emulation programs.

PowerBook is better for editing photos, making brochures, magazines, or editing videos, but not much else.

The facts are the facts. You can run or insult all you like, but you can't hide from the truth.

Peter

[spinner]

Originally posted by peter2002

You must be a "puny-man" if you can't handle 9 lbs. That is probably less than the weight of your lunch at McDs. ;)

Peter

That's very funny. :rolleyes:

If you want carry it around then by all means be my guest. I think that if you take a poll of people that use laptops, I believe you'll find that most prefer a lighter unit, I guess they must be "puny-men" too.

If the latest and greatest from Intel and M$ is what turns your crank then this is the system for you. If you actually care about having a usable operating system and QUALITY hardware, then you should be looking at a PB Ti.

[Durandal7]

Wow, the X-book brings us a degree of portability not seen sine the Mac Portable or when the Mac 128k got a duffel bag carrying case :rolleyes:

[Funkatation]

that thing has the crappiest graphics! its worse than the rage 128 mobility. poo!

[matznentosh]

Bit of a troll thread, isn't this?

If you look more closely at their web site information, they say they use an external battery, not an internal one. It does use a desktop cpu, and everyone who says this is a portable replacement for a desktop computer are right.

Apples and oranges. Unpleasant aspects of Microsoft products aside, it doesn't make sense to try to compare this thing to a Powerbook, they are designed for completely different purposes.

[zimv20]

Originally posted by peter2002

1. X-Book is a minimum 2-3.5 times faster. Since it is faster, I don't need a 5 hour battery when I can get the job done in 2 hours.


he's right.

when i'm on my 800 MHz machine, i type, think, and read twice as fast as when i'm on my 400 MHz machine.

doh.

[zimv20]

Originally posted by peter2002
I would rather [snip] spend time with my family.


wow. they must love that.

[MrMacMan]

Originally posted by zimv20


he's right.

when i'm on my 800 MHz machine, i type, think, and read twice as fast as when i'm on my 400 MHz machine.

doh.

Just tell me DO YOU HAVE INTEL INSIDE YOUR BRAIN?!?!!:rolleyes:
When you are on a faster machine does not make YOU faster... I mean really, I don't type faster on a faster machine... Your page may load faster, but that doesn't even matter.
The Laptop is a monster.
Okay?

[vniow]

Originally posted by MrMacman


Just tell me DO YOU HAVE INTEL INSIDE YOUR BRAIN?!?!!:rolleyes:
When you are on a faster machine does not make YOU faster... I mean really, I don't type faster on a faster machine... Your page may load faster, but that doesn't even matter.
The Laptop is a monster.
Okay?


I think he was being sarcastic. :)

[UnixMac]

Hey, above ^^^^^^^ Chill out.....Go back and re-read that post, he was joking, in other words, HE WAS JOKING:confused:

[sparkleytone]

Originally posted by Billy_ca


99% of people run their notebook off of A/C, not battery, because battery life is so crappy.

first of all, i get damn near 3 hours on my iBook at all times. I do not run 99% of the time on AC, otherwise I would have bought a DESKTOP system.

And as far as 9lbs goes. Thats alot of weight for a notebook. Its not an issue of being a "girlyman" or whatnot, its an issue of lugging the piece of **** everywhere you go. Spend a week on the go with a 9lb laptop, then switch to a powerbook or iBook for a week and you'll understand.

As far as I'm concerned you can have your 3GHz CPUS, because when it comes down to it, it can't run OS X. Thats the deal breaker for me. I didn't switch to Mac because it had faster hardware, I switched because the OS, the bundled software, and the hardware provided work so seamlessly and stably that its was asinine for me to choose otherwise.

[UnixMac]

As far as I'm concerned you can have your 3GHz CPUS, because when it comes down to it, it can't run OS X. Thats the deal breaker for me. I didn't switch to Mac because it had faster hardware, I switched because the OS, the bundled software, and the hardware provided work so seamlessly and stably that its was asinine for me to choose otherwise.

Amen Brother, Mac hardware leaves a lot to be desired, but OS X is rock solid and worth the GHz hit.

[sparkleytone]

Originally posted by peter2002


4. X-Book runs KaZaA, Direct Connect, iMesh, Win MX. PowerBook can't unless you pay $200 to run one of those slow, buggy emulation programs.

The facts are the facts. You can run or insult all you like, but you can't hide from the truth.

Peter

OMFG

the same damn reasons i DONT want a PC EVER AGAIN!!! total crap for software that spies on everything you do, encourages lamer pirates, and makes your 642GHz machine perform like a 486. no thank you.

[bidge]

Originally posted by peter2002
Well, you don't have to be a computer genius or a Phd to figure this one out. Any bubble boy can understand this math.

1. X-Book is a minimum 2-3.5 times faster. Since it is faster, I don't need a 5 hour battery when I can get the job done in 2 hours. I would rather spend my time to kick back and read a book, listen to music, or spend time with my family.

2. X-Book is $500-$1,500 cheaper depending on configurations.

3. X-Book can burn DVDs.

4. X-Book runs KaZaA, Direct Connect, iMesh, Win MX. PowerBook can't unless you pay $200 to run one of those slow, buggy emulation programs.

PowerBook is better for editing photos, making brochures, magazines, or editing videos, but not much else.

The facts are the facts. You can run or insult all you like, but you can't hide from the truth.

Peter

1. A faster computer doesn't make you all of a sudden more productive. Real-time effects does, can you do that using which of your fabulous pieces of software?

2. As always you get what you pay for..

3. You've managed to contradict yourself a couple of times so far, firstly you say i can do anything in two hours, ok so you can edit a movie and burn it to DVD in 2 hours, right....:confused:

4. Why don't you buy stuff...

[King Cobra]

I have a hard time finding a PC that has a firewire port, has a 15+ inch screen, a 4 hour+ battery life (max.) and doesn't weigh your portable TV.

Oh, and my iBook has a flexible handle. :D

As for speed issues, when was the last time you erased your iBook/Powerbook Hard Drive and started from zero? I did earlier today and reinstalled 10.1 on my iBook 466, and speed is a much less great issue. I would probably put what sparkley said as my signature

>the same damn reasons i DONT want a PC EVER AGAIN!!! total crap for software that spies on everything you do, encourages lamer pirates, and makes your 642GHz machine perform like a 486. no thank you.

but I'm supporting Disturbed right now. :)


As for all the flamepiss posts, I had to report one in another thread, which I think got edited some way through this post, because of either car analogies, or personal issues. I don't give a sh** who started it, but posts like that do not belong here.

The other thread was Apple Inc. Rumors > [Apple layoffs or something]. :rolleyes:

[MrMacMan]

Originally posted Me
I see: 1 Vote for life-time banning please.
Anyone else agree?
Don't bash mac's on a Mac rumors site... You want 100's of people rushing your house? :D
We understand that Intel can pump processors out of the Kazoo.
I'm sure we understand that IBM/Motorola can't.
Bashing us is just wrong.

[peter2002]

Hey, I love my Mac too. Apple needs to put a P4 in their machines. They already have Mac OS X.2 running on a P4 in their labs. I don't see why wait delaying such a system. Sure, it may not run AlitiVec apps as fast as it should, but a dual 3GHZ PowerMac, or 2.8 Ghz PowerBook, would outpace any G4 or G5 they plan on releasing in January any day of the week. Apple's plans to go to a G5 in Jan. doesn't make any sense, even to somebody stupid. It is just a waste of everybody time and money.

Woop dee doo. Wow, is all we are going to get in Jan. 2003 is 1.5 Ghz G5 from Apple? Even that wouldn't come close to 3.2-3.4 Ghz P4 Intel plans to release then.

That is problem. Apple's brass has to much pride and are to stupid to dump Motorola and go with a P4 or at the very least an AMD Athlon XP for their CPU.

Peter

[King Cobra]

Pentium 4: Bad idea.

Someone back me up on this, but the P4:
(1) lacks a decent sized L1 Cache,
(2) lacks a L3 cache, and
(3) would fail to give decent support to the Velocity Engine instructions of the G4.

Apple significantly incorporates the VE with their Apps (iMovie, FCP, iTunes, DVD Studio Pro, iCanGoOn...) including Mac OS X. By giving up the necessary L1 Cache you really concede the speed. I do agree that 800MHz vs. 2.8GHz does not make for fair play in the general consumer world, meaning what the average person sees listed on the box, but I don't agree that 800MHz vs. 2.8GHz is a big difference. At most, it may only be a 2x difference, but usually that comes from ********* up your computer with useless crap you'll hardly use. I'd guess, most of the time, it's close competition, but Apple (or someone) has to do a better job of advertising how Mac and PCs truly stack up, and people have to want to look at the stats, not just see them.

[vniow]

OK, calm down peter2002.
There are some things that are out of Apple's control, like processors.
They don't make them, Moto does.

If you're in doubt that even a mere 1.5 Ghz Power4mini-me won't stand up to a PIV twice it's speed, then you need to take a look at some of the benchmarks.

Yes, the PIV will look faster, but even a single core Power4mini-me will stomp it.

It takes years to develop a processor, and it's out of Apple's hands.

Besides, anyone who knows even a little about processor design knows that the PIV was designed by Intel's marketing commitee and not by their most educated chip deigners

[crocodile-man]

Alright, lets be honest here. Most of apple's hardware is designed for video editing /graphic work... and no matter what, in the end it all boils down to the software. Sure I can get a PIECE laptop that is "100000% faster" then a mac, but is it going to run Final Cut Pro? NO! So, until you come up with an editing program for PC that WON AN EMMY...AND will render on a 1 inch thick laptop, please post your PIECE laptop on a PC SITE!

GOD!

[vniow]

Thank you crocodile-man.

Right now Apple's not selling on speed or hardware, they're selling on software. That's what a lot of (but not all) of the switch ads are targeted at. The iApps.
You name me ANYTHING on the PC platform that even remotely compares to ANY of them and you can pry my PC from my cold dead fingers.

......waiting.........


......waiting.........


......waiting.........

..........still waiting........

...............................

oh what's that? You couldn't find any?
Well that's a shame.
Guess I won't be buying a Mac cuz it's slower than PCs then.

I don't ******** care if Intel comes out with a 5Ghz PVI next year, it's not going to run OSX, it's going to run Pallidinium which is the computer equivilent to a $1500 paperweight.

Fine. Go buy a PC. Be happy with Windoze XP. Trust Microsoft. Update your computer with 57 secuity patches. Play music on a media player that spies on you. Have Microsoft activate DRM without your consent.

Enjoy.

[bidge]

Originally posted by crocodile-man
Alright, lets be honest here. Most of apple's hardware is designed for video editing /graphic work... and no matter what, in the end it all boils down to the software. Sure I can get a PIECE laptop that is "100000% faster" then a mac, but is it going to run Final Cut Pro? NO! So, until you come up with an editing program for PC that WON AN EMMY...AND will render on a 1 inch thick laptop, please post your PIECE laptop on a PC SITE!

GOD!

EMMY...AND will render on a 1 inch thick laptop,

Or in some cases not, I know real-time editing doesn't do everything it certainly speeds up a lot of things for sure.

[King Cobra]

This is why I can't stand getting involved with threads like this, people pissing others off, other just being pissed, and, worst of all, if I may post this, people telling others to... (http://www.tekzoned.com/weird/weirdc.jpg)

edvniow is a PC user. And s/he knows how a PC works because she has been using one for a long time. I have been using Macs for a long time, not much different from anyone else. Her point is a little extreme, based on what I said about the avg. computer user.

You take a look at two computers: The Powerbook G4 800MHz and the XBook 2.8GHz. You see right there which is the fastest.

Yet...

When you sign forms for certain files, bills, other machinery, etc. you look at the small print and pay attention to any details and/or problems with a certain issue with the product/bill. Why not bother looking at the small print of PCs vs. Macs before you purchase one? --I'll go a step further...--

The majority of insurance people I have heard from try to slam you with all this information and make you think you will bypass anything you don't understand and just sign up with them. That's no different than buying a computer. If you don't understand what a Cache does, or how it works, look it up. If you are not sure about how the VE works, look it up. If you want to find out why the P4 constantly gets bashed, look it up. You should find plenty of detailed resources.

crocodile-man, peter, you two fall perfectly into the world of being fooled by the easy-to-understand statistics. What you see is:
GHz = speed, no matter how the chip is designed. What Mac users see is:
GHz doesn't matter, but how the L3 Cache and the Velocity Engine make up for speed.

You have to look at the specs of each model computer. I can emphasize this my damnedest, but Apple needs to get that idea, and so does the avg. PC user. And it's not completely Apple's responsibility to emphasize this, but partly Apple's and partly for PC users to take careful notice in these specs and not be fooled by simple marketing.

[ffakr]

Geez, let it die.. the guy is a troll, and he is probably about 10 years old. He has no idea why people buy laptops, he has no idea what a real portable computer is all about. He obviously has never carried a 7+ lb notebook around for a whole day.

I am impressed that he can type 3.5x faster than an 800MHz Powrebook can register though. That is pretty impressive.
:D

sorry, couldn't help myself.

OH, BTW... moving to X86 is the worst posible choice that Apple could ever make (another reason he's only 10 IMHO). Apple lives and dies by the software available to it. If Macs had the same games as PCs, they have 50% market share.
If you move to x86, you BREAK EVERY PIECE OF SOFTWARE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE! Some apps could be recompiled, but some are tweaked to use Altivec. You'd have to remap all those algorithms to SSE2 by hand.
Your Mac cards wouldn't work either... don't think your SCSI card or Radeon is going to plug into a PC.
Not only that, but x86 will be dead in two years anyway. The industry is moving to EPIC and x86-64. Boy, wouldn't Apple do well by moving to a radically different architecture while it was in its twilight.
Moving to X86 would be VERY, VERY BAD.

[MrMacMan]

Originally posted by peter2002
Hey, I love my Mac too. Apple needs to put a P4 in their machines. They already have Mac OS X.2 running on a P4 in their labs. I don't see why wait delaying such a system. Sure, it may not run AlitiVec apps as fast as it should, but a dual 3GHZ PowerMac, or 2.8 Ghz PowerBook, would outpace any G4 or G5 they plan on releasing in January any day of the week. Apple's plans to go to a G5 in Jan. doesn't make any sense, even to somebody stupid. It is just a waste of everybody time and money.

Woop dee doo. Wow, is all we are going to get in Jan. 2003 is 1.5 Ghz G5 from Apple? Even that wouldn't come close to 3.2-3.4 Ghz P4 Intel plans to release then.

That is problem. Apple's brass has to much pride and are to stupid to dump Motorola and go with a P4 or at the very least an AMD Athlon XP for their CPU.

Peter
Apple has there own plans of dealing with Intel and AMD,
Oh I have one question.

[Jimong5]

Speed does not matter. I could have stayed on my P3 500 if I wanted "Speed", but went to a PB 400. That PB was far more useful. My Dual 867 is nice and speedy too, and I can say, its a heck of a lot faster than me. I don't need a brick to get work done.

[arn]

peter2002,

please let us know when you get the XBook... and post it in the appropriate location (general discussion)

arn