13inch iBooks along with Powerbooks

[MacRumors]

Kodawarisan (http://www.kodawarisan.com/ug/) reports that iBook stock is low at resellers. But they also report that alongside upcoming Powerbooks, iBooks with 13" screens at 800mhz G3's will also arrive

Apple had previously hinted (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/06/20020618053542.shtml) that the iBook would likely remain with the G3 processor through the next upgrade. Sporadic rumors (YourDailyMac.com (http://www.yourdailymac.com/)) hint at 1GHz Powerbooks alongside the 800mhz iBooks... but these rumors are of uncertain reliability.

[Hemingray]

But they also report that new iBooks will be released alongside upcoming Powerbooks with 13" screens at 800mhz G3's.

You might wish to rephrase that, it sounds like the PowerBook will have a 13" screen and an 800MHz G3... :D How's THAT for an upgrade! Booyah!

So, I take it this means no more separate 12" and 14" iBooks, just the single 13"? Good enough. I still wanna see a G4 in that thing come this time next year!

[groovebuster]

I hope that they will still have iBooks with 12" screens in the future. What I always liked about the iBooks was the small size and I consider to buy one in the next few months as a sub-notebook, since my Wallstreet's screen has problems since a while and I don't feel like shelling out 1,000 bucks just for a replacement of the LCD...

I want a small iBook, I couldn't care less about a 13" screen...

groovebuster

[oldMac]

I think there's room in the current iBook footprint for a 13" screen. We're talking diagonal, and there's a good bit of unused space around the 12" screen of the current iBook.

[biscuit]

Originally posted by oldMac
I think there's room in the current iBook footprint for a 13" screen. We're talking diagonal, and there's a good bit of unused space around the 12" screen of the current iBook.

This is what I'd like to see. I've always thought there was room for a 13" screen in the 12.1" enclosure. Also, to be honest, the 14" iBook looks silly. Its just too big...

biscuit

[hvfsl]

Looking at the new technology that has come out from IBM, ATI, etc it is posible to make a guess what should be in the new iBooks/Powerbooks.

Powerbook: Will remain the same look but have new hardware.
-ATI 9000M 64MB DDR Graphics
-PC266 DDR RAM
-1MB L3
-133Mhz bus
-At least 40GB HD
-933Mhz and 1000Mhz versions.

ibook: Looking at the recent revisoins to the iMac it would seem that Apple will have a 13in model.
-ATI 7500M 32MB DDR or Geforce 2GO 32MB DDR Graphics
-PC133 RAM
-100Mhz BUS
-AT least 30GB HD
-700Mhz and 800Mhz versions.

[Telomar]

Just to clarify this the G3s have a 200 MHz bus. It isn't double pumped it is just a straight 200 MHz bus.

[Falleron]

I'm sure they could fit a 13" screen into the current 12" ibook. It makes sense to me, Apple saves money by not producing 2 different models + we still get a small portable laptop that is a compromise between 12 + 14.

By the way, I think the ibook will get a higher screen resolution.

[void]

Originally posted by groovebuster
I don't feel like shelling out 1,000 bucks just for a replacement of the LCD...
groovebuster
Click (http://66.243.48.46:7050/component.fib?state=f14ce63345_225&name=14.1+LCD+for+Powerbook+Wallstreet&type=0)

[gandalf55]

what about the TiBook?

[MikeH]

It may be coming out with a new screen, but what will it's native resolution be?

The current 1024 x 768 is too low for OS X in my opinion, in fact it's what puts me off the iBook. It really needs to be around 1280 x 1024 not to feel cramped with most current software.

[Hmm]

I'd be surprised if they increased the resolution, especially if the new screen will be smaller than the 14". I think most people who bought the 14" did so because they felt that the 12" was too small to read at 1024x768. Since the LCD has only one native resolution where everything looks best, I'm betting that Apple will stick with 1024x768 for the iBooks. The higher resoultions would remain a "power user" feature for which they have Powerbooks.

[robguz]

I wish they'd do a 13" widescreen and at least give us 1152x768 which is what the PowerBooks used to have. But I'm sure it will be 1024x768, which raises the question, why bother? Unless it's the exact same size and weight, it doesn't offer much. I think the iBooks appeal is how tiny it is and how sharp that 12" screen is.

I think 933 is optimistic for the low end Ti, and too close to 1Ghz on the high end. I'd guess 800 and 1Ghz, but no DDR, no internal SuperDrive and hopefully a price cut down to the old 2999, 2299 levels. I for one would never again buy a Ti because they are too fragile. I had an accident with mine which cracked the screen and I know it would have been fine if there was some plastic casing to protect the monitor.

[sjonni]

They should skip 800 and go strait for 1000MHZ G3 if it is not going to have G4. Oh, and yes, 32MB VRAM, at least.;) ;) :D

[sjonni]

....And 1gig RAM.Thank you.:D :D

[hvfsl]

Apple will never make the consumer models look faster than the pro models. So the best we can look for is 800Mhz for the iBook, unless the TiBook will be faster than 1Ghz. There are 1.2Ghz G3 chips avaliable at the moment.

Also the TiBook will be 933Mhz and 1000Mhz if the top iBook is 800Mhz, a 800Mhz TiBook will not sell well against a 800 iBook, it is just simple business sense.

[john123]

Originally posted by hvfsl
Apple will never make the consumer models look faster than the pro models. So the best we can look for is 800Mhz for the iBook, unless the TiBook will be faster than 1Ghz. There are 1.2Ghz G3 chips avaliable at the moment.

Also the TiBook will be 933Mhz and 1000Mhz if the top iBook is 800Mhz, a 800Mhz TiBook will not sell well against a 800 iBook, it is just simple business sense.

Um..."simple business sense" or not, the current low-end PowerBook is 667Mhz while the iBook for almost $1000 less runs at 700Mhz...so your logic doesn't quite hold up.

[medea]

Well if they can keep the same footprint of the 12" with a 13" instead, that would be perfect. Lets hope this is true, I do think that they should not discontinue the 12" unless the size will be the same.

[Bradcoe]

Originally posted by Telomar
Just to clarify this the G3s have a 200 MHz bus. It isn't double pumped it is just a straight 200 MHz bus.

No.

100Mhz Bus (http://www.apple.com/ibook/specs.html)

It's a 100 MHz bus as you can see from here. The G4's 167MHz bus is one of the fastest (single rate) when compared to other similar priced purchase options (Intel, AMD, IBM, consumer).
Keeping the G3 at a 100Mhz bus is making the G3 to a G4 look like a Celeron to a Pentium, or Duron to an Athlon.

As far as this discussion goes, I'm sitting infront of an iBook 2001 12" but not typing on it. It's playing music instead. I don't like typing and viewing webpages on the iBook when I have a 19" Monitor at 1280x960 resolution hooked to a really old PC box. The iBook CAN fit a 13.1" screen in it's current case. I wish apple would increase the resolution when they do this. 1152x864 Native on a 13.1" would be so sharp. OS X is way to cramped at 1024x768.
It's the only regret I have about this iBook. 8mb Vid card and low resolution.

[mr evil brkfast]

Been waiting patiently for a new ibook. Would jump at a chance to pick up a 13" in the 12" sized case.

800 mhz? If the PB is 1 GHZ they could at least pump out a 900 mhz ibook. It would be best for the switcher campaign to release the following:

powerbook:
1Ghz and 867 with a 167 mhz bus in the top model and 64MB VR

ibook:
900 mhz (or 1 GHz) and 700 Mhz (for $1099 us) with 32 mb VR; 133 mhz bus

[akula47]

I hope your correct. Another question though. If they do release a revision on November 5th, will it be ready to ship? Shipment in January is going to suck hard. Why even bother with the update, unless you have the machine ready.


Originally posted by hvfsl
Looking at the new technology that has come out from IBM, ATI, etc it is posible to make a guess what should be in the new iBooks/Powerbooks.

Powerbook: Will remain the same look but have new hardware.
-ATI 9000M 64MB DDR Graphics
-PC266 DDR RAM
-1MB L3
-133Mhz bus
-At least 40GB HD
-933Mhz and 1000Mhz versions.

ibook: Looking at the recent revisoins to the iMac it would seem that Apple will have a 13in model.
-ATI 7500M 32MB DDR or Geforce 2GO 32MB DDR Graphics
-PC133 RAM
-100Mhz BUS
-AT least 30GB HD
-700Mhz and 800Mhz versions.

[technocoy]

just a question... what's to stop apple from putting the 2mb level2 cache in the powerbooks??

thanks,
tech

[mortigitempo]

The sahara processor i the current iBooks can support a (genuine) 200mhz bus but it is not currently implemented, the bus speed has been restricted to 100mhz

[nero007]

IMO, the best chip in any Apple computer right now is in the iBook. And if it weren't for the lagging speeds of the tiBook, the iBook would've hit 1ghz a long time ago.

[nero007]

Originally posted by mortigitempo
The sahara processor i the current iBooks can support a (genuine) 200mhz bus but it is not currently implemented, the bus speed has been restricted to 100mhz

It seems Apple has severly crippled this chip so that it is not faster then what is put into the tiBook.

[dabirdwell]

I have gone through several iterations of desire for my new (first) Mac. First I was set on spending all my money to have a TiBook, then the new iMac sounded good, and now I have finally decided to get the next iBook revision.

It will be my perfect mobile social science lab for working on field studies, writing articles, working on books, acting as a wireless web portal, and managing music and digital photos.

I can't wait for this thing! When? When!

OK, well hopefully soon...

[djniche]

Any of you guys thought of this 13" being widescreen? this would give it higher resolution which equals more viewing realstate...

any thoughts?

[Falleron]

Originally posted by nero007


It seems Apple has severly crippled this chip so that it is not faster then what is put into the tiBook.
Blame Motorola for not getting us faster G4's for the Tibook, not apple. That is the reason Apple has crippled the Sahara chip. Oh well.

[kcmac]

I would like to see the iBook go to a 13-inch screen if it can stay within the current size. I would be concerned that making the bezel around the screen smaller could reduce its strength and reduce the area for the airport antenna. (I have dropped my iBook on asphalt with only some minor cosmetic damage.)

A wide screen iBook might put it into the territory of the 14 inch form factor which I think is ugly. Too much room in the keyboard area. (Unless they make the keyboard bigger, wider.)

I can't see that having a 1 Ghz G3 iBook along with a 1Ghz G4 TiBook being a problem. They are two completely different machines.

Besides, with all of the speculation of the new IBM chip coming next fall or whenever, I think some people are thinking of holding back on their purchases...unless Apple can make these next uprgrades tempting. I think they should clock these things up. Make them tempting.

I am also hoping that an upgrade in the near future will actually ship before the end of the year. Some people (I am not in this camp) want a new machine that will still boot into OS 9. Shipping this year could draw these folks into buying now. Especially the PowerBook crowd.

[os4]

Originally posted by Bradcoe


As far as this discussion goes, I'm sitting infront of an iBook 2001 12" but not typing on it. It's playing music instead. I don't like typing and viewing webpages on the iBook when I have a 19" Monitor at 1280x960 resolution hooked to a really old PC box.

Why not hook the 19" to the iBook? I do this, and it works great. I also have a dock to hook my iBook to a separate keyboard and mouse, as well as my other "desktop" periperals. Great set-up for mobility AND "desktop" work.

[pgwalsh]

Originally posted by hvfsl
Apple will never make the consumer models look faster than the pro models. So the best we can look for is 800Mhz for the iBook, unless the TiBook will be faster than 1Ghz. There are 1.2Ghz G3 chips avaliable at the moment.

Also the TiBook will be 933Mhz and 1000Mhz if the top iBook is 800Mhz, a 800Mhz TiBook will not sell well against a 800 iBook, it is just simple business sense.

I hear you on this one. However, I think a 1 or 1.2 ghz G3 iBook with a 13 in. screen is a no brainer. I'd like to see higher resolution as mentioned and 64mb or better video card.

With this setup I would definitely sport a new tower and iBook. I would use the tower for music, video and other processor hungry apps. The iBook would be perfect for weekend trips to Tahoe for writing and writing code snippets.

I think the PowerBook is a tradeoff for a PowerMac. Obviously some could sport both, but they are a select few. Apple should pump up the iBooks as much as possible while it’s still an economically viable solution for consumers and developers.

Due to the lack of speed and the reports of OSX being sluggish on the iBook, I'm hesitant to make a purchase. The PB is just a little too steep for my wallet and I prefer a desktop for projects, so, this excludes the PB. Granted I could get all the extras, but I don't want to bother.

[ddtlm]

hvfsl:

There are 1.2Ghz G3 chips avaliable at the moment.
Proof? Link?

nero007:

IMO, the best chip in any Apple computer right now is in the iBook.
Unfortunately this is not the case. The only things that the G3 has going for it are things directly related to it's 4-stage pipeline, such as a cheap and simple design, and a low penalty for branch mispredicts and instruction dependencies. Obviously it lacks AltiVec, the best feature of the G4, and it even has fewer scalar integer functional units. Oh, it does have 512k of on-die L2, that is a nice thing, though not amazing compared to 1meg of L3.

And if it weren't for the lagging speeds of the tiBook, the iBook would've hit 1ghz a long time ago.
Proof? Link?

[pgwalsh]

Originally posted by os4


Why not hook the 19" to the iBook? I do this, and it works great. I also have a dock to hook my iBook to a separate keyboard and mouse, as well as my other "desktop" periperals. Great set-up for mobility AND "desktop" work.

This was a common solution for my PC while at Nortel Networks. It worked for that job, but I don't want that as my creative workspace. I prefer having a laptop and a desktop. That's why a beefed up iBook would be perfect. The low price allows for the purchase of two machines.

[Postal]

I'm really hoping that this rumour is true... I'd love to have an iBook at 13" screen size, whether it's just a larger 4:3 display or through widescreen. The widescreen would likely be a better decision - not just for the "chic" factor, but in that it would also guarantee a higher resolution!

Speaking of which, something that bugs me tremendously is that there are too many laptops that use a 1024x768 resolution when they really shouldn't. I've been helping a friend shop for a laptop (unfortunately, the technical requirements preclude a Mac - even though my friend was interested), and I've found that even some 15" laptops still max out at 1024x768! That's low even for a desktop LCD (where you tend to sit further away from the screen).

[jkojima]

I own a PC laptop with a 13" XGA screen, am using a 12" XGA iBook 700 on loan, and also have access to a 14" XGA PowerBook Pismo G3. This is in addition to the 15" XGA LCD monitor attached to my desktop PC.

So, that's 1024x768 resolution as seen from every possible physical size from 12" to 15". Of all the screens, I am MOST happy with the density of the 12" iBook screen. It just looks... right. OS X DEMANDS a high density screen. With its ability to dynamically scale icons and text (coupled with almost every application's ability to zoom the working window, e.g. Word) I think it's a terrible waste to run that OS on a chunky 14" or even 13" XGA screen. Dell's super-high density UXGA 15" screens are gorgeous for text and photo editing... I would love to see a PowerBook with a resolution to match this, as the pixel density is closer to the resolution of print. And I would love to see an iBook with an SXGA or SXGA+ screen (1400 x 1050 for example).

The question is: will this happen on November 5th? I seriously doubt it - it sounds to me like the upgrades will be minor speed bumps and otherwise internal changes. The market at large seems to be content with XGA screens, and I doubt Apple will diverge from this for the iBooks.

[Kid Red]

I'm not sure where some of you are getting the 933 & 1.0ghz speeds for the new PBs. Apple always makes the top end the bottom end. That means we get 800& 933. Anyone hoping for a 1.0ghz PB in a few weeks is doing just that, hoping.

[NHMac]

Originally posted by akula47
I hope your correct. Another question though. If they do release a revision on November 5th, will it be ready to ship? Shipment in January is going to suck hard. Why even bother with the update, unless you have the machine ready.




You gotta believe that if they are annoucing this before x-mas that they will be ready to ship that day.... other wise you kill your holiday sales.

I think 933 and 1gig in the TiBooks would be a mistake... unless the 933 has drop in its price point.

[katchow]

i'm certainly trying not to get my hopes up...

the translation i got of Kodawarisan's message is that because of low supplies they thought it might be a "possibility" that there would be a simultaneous release...as opposed to "alongside upcoming Powerbooks, will be 13" 800Mhz iBooks". An as far as yourdailymac goes...that's got to be the silliest rumors site i've seen...they pluck their material out of forums like these by any speculating joe schmoe...

i know rumor sites are not to be taken too seriously, i just wish that this was supposed "insider info" instead of pure guessing...

listen to me, i feel silly...this waiting is makin' me stupid :)

ughh!

[ryan]

Originally posted by Kid Red
I'm not sure where some of you are getting the 933 & 1.0ghz speeds for the new PBs. Apple always makes the top end the bottom end. That means we get 800& 933. Anyone hoping for a 1.0ghz PB in a few weeks is doing just that, hoping.
Not always...

1st generation TiPB - 400MHz/500MHz
2nd generation TiPB - 550MHz/667MHz

QuickSilver PM G4 (High End) - Dual 1GHz
WindTunnel PM G4 (Low End) - Dual 867MHz

There are other examples but those are some of the more recent ones that show if nothing else there is no pattern.

[avkills]

Apple has crippled this processor. It is a known fact that the processor can be overclocked to 800Mhz through software and in fact, the settings allow it to scale to 2Ghz, which would most definately fry it, but whatever.

If I get a powerbook anytime soon, you can bet I will opening up my iBook to see if you can hack it to a 200Mhz bus.

I would love to see what the sahara G3 could really do if in fact Apple let it have a 200Mhz bus, 200Mhz RAM, ran it as fast it could go, etc etc.

-mark

[esome]

Originally posted by technocoy
just a question... what's to stop apple from putting the 2mb level2 cache in the powerbooks??

thanks,
tech

I'm talking out my ass here so someone please jump in if they know better but I think the answer is, at least in part, $$$. L2 cache RAM is really expensive and would lower Apple's margins significantly.

[ryan]

Originally posted by ddtlm
hvfsl:


Proof? Link?

nero007:


Unfortunately this is not the case. The only things that the G3 has going for it are things directly related to it's 4-stage pipeline, such as a cheap and simple design, and a low penalty for branch mispredicts and instruction dependencies. Obviously it lacks AltiVec, the best feature of the G4, and it even has fewer scalar integer functional units. Oh, it does have 512k of on-die L2, that is a nice thing, though not amazing compared to 1meg of L3.


Proof? Link?
I wasn't the OP and I can't provide all the proof to backup their assertions but if you go here (http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/products/PowerPC_750FX_Microprocessor) there is at least one aricle on IBM's 1GHz G3.

I'd be real interested in seeing a comparrison of a G3 and G4 system with everything else, memory, bus, video, etc., being the same. Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be a real easy way to do that. I suppose some performance tests could be run on an 450MHzB&W G3, swap out the processor with a 450MHz G4 and then re-run the tests...

[ncbill]

I would love a 13" screen (still at 1024x768).

There is no way Apple will put a widescreen LCD into the iBook.

If you want G4 and widescreen LCD Apple is ready to sell you a TiBook today (at almost twice the price of their iBook)

More realistically, I'm only looking for 800Mhz G3 and 30GB hard drive (though you can overclock the G3 in OS X and I'm guessing you could get at least 900Mhz to work off of a 800Mhz chip)

Video really needs an upgrade to at least partially counter the lack of Altivec for 10.2 and later, but I wonder if it will be any more than doubling the memory on the existing chip (32MB but no better video chip) Still, I guess that would help.

[ryan]

Originally posted by esome


I'm talking out my ass here so someone please jump in if they know better but I think the answer is, at least in part, $$$. L2 cache RAM is really expensive and would lower Apple's margins significantly.
The problem also is, I think, that L2 cache RAM generates more heat which in turn consumes more power.

[Maclicious]

Originally posted by dabirdwell
I have gone through several iterations of desire for my new (first) Mac. First I was set on spending all my money to have a TiBook, then the new iMac sounded good, and now I have finally decided to get the next iBook revision.

It will be my perfect mobile social science lab for working on field studies, writing articles, working on books, acting as a wireless web portal, and managing music and digital photos.


Personal experience: I have an iBook 500 MHz and generally love it. I am a writer of fiction and paper & pencil role-playing games, and spend 8+ hours a day writing text (on Word for OS X). I also like to make iMovies, listen to MP3s, and even play electronic games on the box. The iBook can do all this pretty well, and even stutter along with Warcraft III just quickly enough to keep me playing it. Pretty sweet.

But, after almost 12 months of this, I've come to the conclusion that 12 inches of screen is too small for my particular intensive daily use of it (for writing). It may be that 13 inches would do the trick.

But, I've decided that I'd rather go with 15 inches--when the upgrade with a decent Superdrive comes (a Superdrive with at least 4x DVD burning speed), I'm buying :-). In fact, even if the latest update of the Ti-Book doesn't have the Superdrive I want, I'll probably get the purported Piondeer 4x DVD stand alone burner (finally, someplace to store all my raw iMovie footage!)

[Telomar]

Originally posted by Bradcoe


No.

100Mhz Bus (http://www.apple.com/ibook/specs.html)

It's a 100 MHz bus as you can see from here. The G4's 167MHz bus is one of the fastest (single rate) when compared to other similar priced purchase options (Intel, AMD, IBM, consumer). I think IBM (http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/products/powerpc/newsletter/oct2001/new-prod1.html) would be the better source.

Apple limits the bus not IBM.

[sjonni]

Originally posted by hvfsl
Apple will never make the consumer models look faster than the pro models. So the best we can look for is 800Mhz for the iBook, unless the TiBook will be faster than 1Ghz. There are 1.2Ghz G3 chips avaliable at the moment.

Also the TiBook will be 933Mhz and 1000Mhz if the top iBook is 800Mhz, a 800Mhz TiBook will not sell well against a 800 iBook, it is just simple business sense.


...Uhh. Please tell me where I can get this chip. And can I use it in my ibook?:D

[ddtlm]

Telomar, ryan:

The IBM 750fx paper says things like:

sampling for this new processor is planned for January, 2002
and
the 750FX will be offered at frequencies up to 1 GHz
Based on that, it is apparent that this article proves nothing about how fast 750fx chips can currently run. Perhaps they can hit 1.0ghz... perhaps not.

avkills:

Apple has crippled this processor. It is a known fact that the processor can be overclocked to 800Mhz through software and in fact, the settings allow it to scale to 2Ghz, which would most definately fry it, but whatever.
Apparently the new G4's can be overclocked as high as 1.4ghz. Are you going to claim that Apple is "crippling" them as well? And you're damn right that no 750fx on 130nm would make it anywhere near 2.0ghz, so who cares what those settings would allow... again, this means nothing as far as Apple "crippling" the 750fx. I'll admit that PC133 RAM and a 133mhz FSB would be nice, but such a change would likely not be earth-shattering. Anything beyond the 133mhz FSB and RAM would be getting into new chipsets and new memory, such as DDR, and that takes a lot of work and so I do not blame Apple for not doing it (I suspect they never will pair a G3 with DDR).

[sjonni]

Do you folks think the iBook will get a faster drive (DVD-CD/RW) on this update?:p :p

[ddtlm]

ryan:

The problem also is, I think, that L2 cache RAM generates more heat which in turn consumes more power.
While I'm sure it generates some heat, it's not all that much. Apple has kept the 2mb L3 away probably for a combination of product line segmentation and cheapness.

[Bradcoe]

Originally posted by Telomar
I think IBM (http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/products/powerpc/newsletter/oct2001/new-prod1.html) would be the better source.

Apple limits the bus not IBM.

You're correct. However I was referring to, and obviously should have clarified, the iBooks bus speed, running with the G3.

Therefore: Be more specific.

[Bradcoe]

Originally posted by os4


Why not hook the 19" to the iBook? I do this, and it works great. I also have a dock to hook my iBook to a separate keyboard and mouse, as well as my other "desktop" periperals. Great set-up for mobility AND "desktop" work.

I've done this before. 1024x768 is still 1024x768 regardless of it being spread over 19" or 12.1". In fact, I prefer the look of all those pixels squeezed into less square inches. It gives it a crisper image. Now, if the iBook could do 1280x or something higher than 1024x then I would run it on the 19"

[avkills]

Originally posted by ddtlm
Telomar, ryan:

The IBM 750fx paper says things like:


and

Based on that, it is apparent that this article proves nothing about how fast 750fx chips can currently run. Perhaps they can hit 1.0ghz... perhaps not.

avkills:


Apparently the new G4's can be overclocked as high as 1.4ghz. Are you going to claim that Apple is "crippling" them as well? And you're damn right that no 750fx on 130nm would make it anywhere near 2.0ghz, so who cares what those settings would allow... again, this means nothing as far as Apple "crippling" the 750fx. I'll admit that PC133 RAM and a 133mhz FSB would be nice, but such a change would likely not be earth-shattering. Anything beyond the 133mhz FSB and RAM would be getting into new chipsets and new memory, such as DDR, and that takes a lot of work and so I do not blame Apple for not doing it (I suspect they never will pair a G3 with DDR).

Actually PC133 Ram works in the iBook, although it only runs at 100Mhz, even though the system profiler says it is PC133. Apple's current system controller for the Xserve and the top tier towers could handle DDR RAM coupled to the Sahara G3. Even if the bus moved to 133 and utilized DDR, it would work and be true DDR to the processor.

The amazing thing is that the 700Mhz Sahara only kicks out 5-6watts max, which is pretty impressive.

I mentioned in another BB that in my opinion the current crop of iBooks are basically souped up versions of the pre-titanium powerbooks.

I would still like to see how a machine would run if the Sahara G3 was used to its full potential. :D

-mark

[pgwalsh]

Originally posted by ddtlm
Telomar, ryan:Based on that, it is apparent that this article proves nothing about how fast 750fx chips can currently run. Perhaps they can hit 1.0ghz... perhaps not.

IBM did have the 1Ghz G3 listed on the site for "purchase," but they changed their site around since then. This was brought up in the forums before and there was a link, but I'm not going to bother.

[ryan]

Originally posted by pgwalsh

IBM did have the 1Ghz G3 listed on the site for "purchase," but they changed their site around since then. This was brought up in the forums before and there was a link, but I'm not going to bother.
Thanks for backing me up pgwalsh. Also, since that 1GHz document was from 10+ months ago I'm sure they've reached that speed, and possibly exceeded by now. Remember, this is IBM we're talking about, not Motorola.

[ryan]

Originally posted by ddtlm
ryan:


While I'm sure it generates some heat, it's not all that much. Apple has kept the 2mb L3 away probably for a combination of product line segmentation and cheapness.
Segment it from what, the iBook, the G4 towers? The PowerBook already differentiates itself from the iBook in part through its use of a G4 instead of a G3. Seeing as how Apple doesn't make a portable that is positioned "above" the TiPB in terms of features/price the reason for not including the larger L3 cache is almost certainly a price/technical issue, not a marketing one. As far as a differentiation between Apple's desktop and portable lines that occurs through the very nature of a given machine being either a desktop or portable.

[Ensoniq]

I don't know if Apple has plans to release anything on November 5th, so I can't speak to that. But I did want to address the concept of a 13" wide-screen iBook.

Biggest positives for the 12" iBook: Compact size, awesome screen clarity.
Biggest complaints on the 14" iBook: Too bulky, 1024x768 max resolution.

We all assume Apple sells more 12" machines than the 14" ones. And though it seemed like a good idea on paper, 14" has overall been a flop for mother Apple, coming out of her womb like a fanged beast. :)

So Apple should look at the success of the 12" and start over with the next revision of a larger-screened iBook. I feel a 13" wide-screen iBook is perfect, for a wide (no pun intended) variety of reasons.

First, let's look at current Apple LCD-based products:

15" PowerBook G4 &nbsp&nbsp- Currently wide-screen.
17" iMac G4 LCD &nbsp&nbsp&nbsp- Currently wide-screen.
15" iMac G4 LCD &nbsp&nbsp&nbsp- Speculation says discontinued shortly.
15" Studio Display - Officially discontinued.
17" Studio Display - Could be replaced now by iMac 17" wide-screen.
19" Studio Display - Rumored to be coming soon...and wide-screen.
22" Studio Display - Currently wide-screen.
23" Studio Display - Currently wide-screen.

See a pattern here? Apple clearly loves the wide-screen concept. They focus on iMovie/iDVD/SuperDrive as major selling points. So to turn the entire Apple LCD lineup into wide-screen across the board would be a major coup for them.

The poor iBooks stand out as being non-conformists with their very "outdated" square screens. So it's perfectly logical to believe that a wide-screen iBook DOES fit into Apple's product vision. And if done right, it could replace BOTH the 12" & 14" iBooks simultaneously, cutting Apple's production costs.

So with all that out of the way, let's address this theoretical 13" wide-screen iBook:

1 - Compact travel size like the 12" iBook:

Current 12" iBook: &nbsp&nbsp11.2" Wide / 9.1" Deep / 1.35" Thick
Current 15" TiBook: &nbsp13.4" Wide / 9.5" Deep / 1" Thick

With the measurements above, we see that the TiBook is 2.2" wider than the iBook, but only .4" deeper. NOW...imagine an iBook shaped like the TiBook, but with a 13" screen. What would happen to the size? It would be both LESS WIDE and LESS DEEP than the current TiBook. Even leaving room for more bezel around the screen to keep it more rugged, the math tells us this new iBook would have to be less deep, and only slightly wider than the current 12" iBook. No one could say that such a machine would not be compact. And it would even further make the 14" iBook look like the behemoth that it is.

2 - Increased resolution over the 14" iBook:

Current 12" iBook: &nbsp1024x768 Max Resolution
Current 14" iBook: &nbsp1024x768 Max Resolution

Two machines...one with a 2" larger screen. SAME RESOLUTION. If the issue for buying a larger screen is eyesight, it may not matter. But if you wanted a larger desktop area, no such luck.

Now what if we have a 13" iBook and 15" TiBook. Just like the above...2 machines, one with a 2" larger screen. Theoretically, Apple could give that iBook the same resolutions as the TiBook, with a maximum possible of 1280x854.

However, in order to differentiate between the more expensive PowerBook, and possibly due in part to a less powerful graphics chip, let's say 1152x768. (That is what the TiBook originally had before the jump to 1280x854, which was a 23% increase.)

So even if we assume 1152x768, that gives us a 12.5% increase in desktop space over BOTH current iBooks, in a package easily smaller than the 14" iBook and arguably only slightly wider than the 12" iBook. With a pixel density guaranteed to produce the 12" sharpness and clarity many gush over.

Frankly, a 13" wide-screen iBook would kick all previous iBooks square in the nads. If we get 32 MB of VRAM...even better. If the TiBook hits 1 GHz with a G4 and we can offer an 800 MHz to 1 GHz G3 Sahara chip...even better still. But I hope all the nay-sayers claiming Apple would never build this machine are wrong. It would have all the same distinctions between it and the PowerBook that today's iBooks have. But even changing NOTHING but the screen, it would be a far superior machine to either current iBook offering.

IMHO, of course...

[ddtlm]

avkills:

Apple's current system controller for the Xserve and the top tier towers could handle DDR RAM coupled to the Sahara G3. Even if the bus moved to 133 and utilized DDR, it would work and be true DDR to the processor.
Does it use the same bus protocol? And why do you think that they can "utilize DDR" on the G3 FSB... there is certainly nothing that I am aware of that suggests that. It may be able to go to 200mhz SDR FSB, but that is not the same as 200mhz DDR, and certainly not the same as 266mhz and 333mhz DDR.

ryan

Segment it from what, the iBook, the G4 towers?
If I recall Apple didn't put the L3 onto the PBooks until the iBook was around the corner with 512k. But anyway, if you won't accept the segmentation idea, then you are left with cost and nothing else. (Heat is not a problem for a single extra MB of L3.)

[MikeH]

So even if we assume 1152x768, that gives us a 12.5% increase in desktop space over BOTH current iBooks, in a package easily smaller than the 14" iBook and arguably only slightly wider than the 12" iBook. With a pixel density guaranteed to produce the 12" sharpness and clarity many gush over.

I'm hoping for much the same thing. What with the1024 x 768 res 15 inch Display discontinued, and the 15 inch iMac on it's way out it would be logical to make to increase the res of the iBooks - I think OS X needs the room.

I'd also like to see iDVD work with external DVD writers, seems a shame to me it doesn't (yes, yes, I'm sure it's all to do with selling Macs with DVD-R's, it just seems a bit petty that's all).

[ryan]

Originally posted by ddtlm
ryan

If I recall Apple didn't put the L3 onto the PBooks until the iBook was around the corner with 512k. But anyway, if you won't accept the segmentation idea, then you are left with cost and nothing else. (Heat is not a problem for a single extra MB of L3.)
Well since I'm not much of hardware guy I'll take your word on the heat/power issue, but as you're found of saying if you you could provide proof/link that would be nice.

So cost it is then. Another issue may simply have been that chips with L3 cache weren't available, or at least not at a reasonable cost (Gasp! There's that word again.).

[D*I*S_Frontman]

Ensoniq makes a strong argument. Who wouldn't buy a widescreen higher res 13" iBook? It would still be MUCH closer in dimensions to the 12" than the 14".

It is entirely possible that the "widescreen only" coup may be in the works--the 15" displays are already gone. Take the 17" iMac's display and make it a stand-alone replacement for the 4:3 15" lcd monitor. Phase out 15" iMacs. Add new 19" widescreen monitor. Make iBooks widescreen. All very doable before the Christmas season.

17, 19, 23 inch widescreen lcd monitors
13 inch widescreen iBooks
15 inch widescreen TiBooks

What a marketing crusher--all systems widescreen beauties (except eMac and original iMac combo units). Instantly makes all PCs look antiquated by comparison.

Who knows? Another Christmas present from Apple I would like to see would be allowing for 3rd party DVD-R support for iDVD instead of the gun-in-the-ribs tactic of only allowing it under Studio DVD. It certainly would get even more people addicted to the platform in the long run.

And while I am sure most of you are right about Apple intentionally crippling the Saharas, I think it is deplorable to do so. G3 vs G4 (AltiVec) should be more than enough differentiation. There is no reason we shouldn't have 800mhz-1ghz iBook offerings along side 800mhz-1ghz TiBooks. Bus speed, graphic card/memory, and AltiVec should be more than enough of a difference between a "consumer" and "pro" machine to justify price stratification, not to mention the killer display and miraculously thin form factor of the TiBooks.

Would a faster widescreen iBook eat some Ti sales? Perhaps to a trivial degree. But how many "switchers" would hop to make the widescreen iBook their first Mac? How many legacy Mac owners would bite on such a sweet plum rather than limp their old system along another year? A new widescreen iBook buyer now will likely be an upgrader down the road--and given the eventual demise of the G3, that upgrade will be occuring sooner than later, I bet. I am convinced a lot of TiBook owners buy them for the status of owning the coolest machine around, and those buyers won't care about the iBook's specs because its form factor is not nearly as chic. Real pros who use AltiVec-heavy applications won't care about the iBook's speed either, as it won't help render Photoshop filters or video transitions anywhere near as fast as a G4, even if base clock speeds are the same. So who are we actually stealing away from Ti purchases by making a faster widescreen iBook? Maybe a few indecisive prosumers balking at the Ti's premium pricetag. That's it.

With the economic woes of this year even affecting Apple somewhat, wouldn't it be great to blast through the Christmas season with a fresh round of new products? Let's go out with a bang instead of a whimper. WIDESCREENS ALL!!

Ensoniq, I hope you are right. And I hope Apple is listening...

[cubist]

"Frankly, a 13" wide-screen iBook would kick all previous iBooks square in the nads... even changing NOTHING but the screen, it would be a far superior machine to either current iBook offering."

I'm sold! Bring it on!

:cool:

[ddtlm]

ryan:

I'll take your word on the heat/power issue, but as you're found of saying if you you could provide proof/link that would be nice
Hehe. :) My reasoning is that no chip so small as 1MB L3 that lacks a heatsink can be drawing much power.... there is a very nice relationship between chips making heat and chips using power.

I ran over to www.micron.com but couldn't find actual heat specs on individal chips of RAM in the time allotted. Gotta run now.