Are Apple iBooks Next? [Archive]

MacRumors

Sep 18, 2003, 04:20 PM

Based on product cycle timelines (http://buyersguide.macrumors.com), Apple's iBook is the next model due to be updated. Apple last updated their iBook in April 2003 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/04/20030422103438.shtml), equiping the consumer laptop with 900MHz G3s at the high end.

AppleInsider's recent PowerBook report (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=137), which was proven to contain accurate information, also offered a few hints at upcoming iBooks. According to that report, Apple is "readying updates" to their consumer laptops and will bring the iBook up to par with the rest of their line with USB 2.0 and Airport Extreme support.

Assuming Apple continues to use the G3 processor, the most likely candidate is the IBM 750GX (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/06/20030630221128.shtml) processor which is targetted for production in December 2003.

The PowerPC 750GX will be offered at speeds up to 1.1GHz with 1MB of L2 Cache. This represents an upgrade from 512k L2 Cache in the current iBook processor (750FX). While there have been numerous unverified reports of Altivec-enabled G3s, few reliable reports of this have emerged.

bennetsaysargh

Sep 18, 2003, 04:23 PM

yes!
am i the only one who loves the iBooks?
that will be by first portable. im starting to save up already:)

Freg3000

Sep 18, 2003, 04:26 PM

Sounds good to me. If the PowerBooks lose their L3 cache and double the L2 cache, wand still maintain equal/better performance, strictly doubling the L2 cache on the iBook would be fantastic.

Does it bother anyone else that IBM uses 750-X naming scheme for these chips? 750FX, 750 GX and, 750 VX. The 750, 760, 770.

(end irrelevant pet peeve). :)

mainstreetmark

Sep 18, 2003, 04:29 PM

Let the weekly iBook rumors comence!!

JtheLemur

Sep 18, 2003, 04:35 PM

I totally hope they do a new enclosure. w00t!

ColoJohnBoy

Sep 18, 2003, 04:36 PM

Can someone explain to me the difference between the L2 cache on PowerBooks and the L2 on iBooks? It seems strange that the PowerBooks are just now brought up to the iBook level, but that the iBooks might get even more very soon.

lmalave

Sep 18, 2003, 04:38 PM

Originally posted by bennetsaysargh
yes!
am i the only one who loves the iBooks?
that will be by first portable. im starting to save up already:)

I love my iBook - it's a great little workhorse. At 800 MHz it's already a great little machine. With 37% faster MHz, a larger L2 cache, some DDR RAM, and a slightly upgraded video card, the next revision of iBooks will probably be at least 50% faster than my current machine, which I'm already totally satisfied with. I fully expect my iBook to keep me happy for another couple of years, but my next purchase will probably still be whatever the latest generation iBook is at the time.

shen

Sep 18, 2003, 04:38 PM

i love my iBook, and hope they keep bumping it. it is IMHO the single best choice for new converts to Mac. a tiny little weigh nothing laptop at that price with impressive performance (once you max the RAM) is a great entry product. but.....

altivec? on a G3? then what is the difference between it and a G4? surely that won't happen before they have a G5 powerbook, will it?

bluedalmatian

Sep 18, 2003, 04:40 PM

"am i the only one who loves the iBooks?"

No. I do too, and I hope the rumours about it being discontinued aren't true.

I've got an old blueberry iBook which a relative now uses and it works great still even though its getting on.

It will need to be replaced in the next year though cos its hard disk is too small ( I don't want to upgrade it cos its not worth it) and it doesnt have firewire so I've been eyeing up the white iBooks for a while. I didnt used to like them but I do now. In fact I used to hate the look of the original PBG4 but they look a damn siight better now, I still prefer the iBook though.

lmalave

Sep 18, 2003, 04:41 PM

Originally posted by JtheLemur
I totally hope they do a new enclosure. w00t!

Probably not for a 200MHz speed bump. Besides, I actually like the white iBooks - I think they're much more distinctive than the AluBooks. I mean, companies like Fujitsu and Sharp have metal-cased laptops. But who else has white Pyrex-encased laptops?

XnavxeMiyyep

Sep 18, 2003, 04:49 PM

utkucan

Sep 18, 2003, 04:56 PM

don't worry guys the iBook is going g5

like in 2007... :D

impierced

Sep 18, 2003, 05:00 PM

Originally posted by shen
altivec? on a G3? then what is the difference between it and a G4? surely that won't happen before they have a G5 powerbook, will it?

Good question. The difference is that one is manufactured by IBM (G3 with an AltiVec compatible vector processing unit) and one by Motorola (G4).

So, the question then becomes, which company would you rather have producing your "G4 compatible" chips?

Steven1621

Sep 18, 2003, 05:01 PM

the ibook line is long overdue for an update. the high end ibook models cost more then a 12in powerbook. apple would sell a ton more ibooks if they had the 12 in cd model going for $799, the 12in combo at $999, and the 14in combo at $1299. this would make much more sense for their product line.

also, i really hope they put a better keyboard on the new model.

usersince86

Sep 18, 2003, 05:16 PM

With the new PowerBook line, Apple needs to revise the iBook line very soon (or lower prices).

I too think iBooks are cool and a great laptop -- but right now, bang for the buck, it would be almost silly to buy an iBook (unless you don't need a CD-RW, I guess).

12.1" ibook/PowerBook Comparison (w/combo drive):

SAME (essentially)
================
12.1-inch TFT display
1024x768 resolution
512K L2 cache
40GB Ultra ATA/100 drive
Combo Drive (DVD-ROM/CD-RW)
10/100BASE-T Ethernet
Built-in 56K v.92 modem
FireWire 400

DIFFERENCES (iBook --- PowerBook)
==============================
900Mhz G3 --- 1Ghz G4
128MB SDRAM --- 256MB DDR266 SDRAM
ATI Mobility Radeon 7500 (32MB) --- NVIDIA GeForceFXGo 5200 (32MB)
USB 1.1 --- USB 2.0
AirPort ready --- AirPort extreme ready
(No BlueTooth) --- BlueTooth
VGA, S-Video and composite video --- Mini-DVI video out
$1299 --- $1599

DEFINITELY WORTH THE $300 DIFFERENCE (imho)

Again, the iBook has a market, but right now they need updated (or, again, prices need lowered).

Lancetx

Sep 18, 2003, 05:17 PM

Originally posted by Steven1621
the ibook line is long overdue for an update. the high end ibook models cost more then a 12in powerbook. apple would sell a ton more ibooks if they had the 12 in cd model going for $799, the 12in combo at $999, and the 14in combo at $1299. this would make much more sense for their product line.

also, i really hope they put a better keyboard on the new model.

I agree. The iBook line is in dire need of either a major update or a price cut. The last update in April was only a 100MHz speed bump and little else. Left as they stand now, they need to drop the prices $200 across the board if there won't be any updates coming before year end. Otherwise the newly updated 12" PowerBook @ $1599 is going to eat up almost all of the iBook sales because it's a lot more system for the money.

engelb15

Sep 18, 2003, 05:19 PM

DominicusG

Sep 18, 2003, 05:27 PM

I have an iBook from the Nov. 2001 line and it is of much high quality than the current offering.

Case in point, the palm rests on mine have a nice silver metallic look, whereas on the new ones, they are cheap looking grey plastic.

People whine and whine about price points, and to match them Apple has to start cutting corners like the one mentioned above.

How about the new power connectors? They are now all cheap white plastic. Looks lousy when plugged into a new aluminum PowerBook. My iBook has the metallic one.

pyrotoaster

Sep 18, 2003, 05:27 PM

I agree the iBooks are falling behind, but Apple's going to have to be very careful with how they update it.

The 12" Powerbook is selling very well, and it's a great prosumer machine (I'm buying one of the new ones). Apple doesn't want an updated iBook cutting into to Powerbook sales.

An iBook update is on the way, but I wouldn't expect anything big until the Powerbooks are running G5s, and Apple can really explore the iBook's potential. From what we've been hearing, IBM can put together some great processors based off the G3.

Flyers486

Sep 18, 2003, 05:30 PM

I still think the iBooks will move to a one-screen format to differentiate from the diversified powerbook. A report surfaced quite a while back about Apple's production of 13inch wide screens in their Taiwan plant. Such claims, however, have yet to be corroberated. I do not expect to see these screens to make it into the next pre-christmas iBook update. I see a case revision upon Powerbook G5 release in Mid-March (from what I read). I really do feel that a screen and slightly modified case are necessary to the iBook line in early 2004. Hopefully, I'll see these results along with modified altivec g3 before I go to collge next year.

Good Luck Mates

GW

pyrotoaster

Sep 18, 2003, 05:35 PM

Originally posted by DominicusG
I have an iBook from the Nov. 2001 line and it is of much high quality than the current offering.

Case in point, the palm rests on mine have a nice silver metallic look, whereas on the new ones, they are cheap looking grey plastic.

People whine and whine about price points, and to match them Apple has to start cutting corners like the one mentioned above.

How about the new power connectors? They are now all cheap white plastic. Looks lousy when plugged into a new aluminum PowerBook. My iBook has the metallic one.
Yes, Apple has had to make some sacarfices with the iBooks in order to lower their prices, but lower prices help the iBook sell better, and that's a good thing.
The reason Apple has a seven percent share of U.S. portable market is because of the iBook and the 12" Powerbook (and the 15 and 17 inch Powerbooks, but to a lesser extent).

As for the power connectors, their actually very well designed. What they've done is just standardized them. You really appreciate that when you need to use the international plug adaptors (if you never have, it actually works very well. You simply replace the part of the adaptor that has the plugs on it with the correct plugs for whatever country you're in).

Rincewind42

Sep 18, 2003, 05:46 PM

Originally posted by ColoJohnBoy
Can someone explain to me the difference between the L2 cache on PowerBooks and the L2 on iBooks? It seems strange that the PowerBooks are just now brought up to the iBook level, but that the iBooks might get even more very soon.

The G3 (from 750FX I think) has a 512KB L2 cache. The G4 (up until 7457) had a 256KB L2 cache. The G4 7457 has a 512KB L2 cache (this is the band new G4 CPU that is now used in the new PowerBooks). In both cases the L2 cache runs at the processor's speed. So the only difference was the size, of which there is now parity.

vollspacken

Sep 18, 2003, 05:55 PM

update the iBook to 1.1Ghz and drop the 14" model... noone needs it, since it has no increase in screen resolution. it's just bulky and ugly, drop it...

I hope they keep the current 12" screen and the white case for a long long time. it is simply perfect. a 13" would not be as compact as it is right now.

I'm still tempted to get me an entry level iBook as a backup machine but I have to remind me that I don't really need a second mac laptop :)

vSpacken

Dont Hurt Me

Sep 18, 2003, 06:09 PM

why not just throw in the 1 gig g4? they got to be getting cheap for apple and now you are only writing for 2 chips,g4 & g5.

macphoria

Sep 18, 2003, 06:10 PM

1MB L2 Cache? Wow. This thing is going to kick some major booty!

daRAT

Sep 18, 2003, 06:15 PM

Originally posted by bennetsaysargh
yes!
am i the only one who loves the iBooks?
that will be by first portable. im starting to save up already:)

Nope, the PB upgrade barely registered with me. An Ibook upgrade would have me dancing in the streets!

I still think dollar for dollar the iBooks are best laptop deal and have been considering a used one, so I can download my digital camera images on the go.

Bunzi2k4

Sep 18, 2003, 06:19 PM

i was planning on getting an ibook, but i turned to the pb 12". i do think the g4's are a bit better, and i don't like the white too much... i liked it when they had the colors, but i didn't like the i books then cuz they were bulky... if they could make something that is cool and compact then i would consider getting an ibook for my next purchase. i think they should go all out with the powerbooks, i don't mind if its a bit thicker or a bit heavier, i think they should be something like the speed deamons and then the ibooks are more in the lightweight division, giving you good speed (not the best mayb g4 when pb's are g5's) but they are small and lightweight... price drops wouldn't hurt either...

raynegus

Sep 18, 2003, 06:28 PM

A hope they get a drawerless DVD drive like on the powerbooks. That and Airport Extreme would be sweet.

Freg3000

Sep 18, 2003, 06:31 PM

You know, some people don't care about resolution. A lot of people probably don't know what it is. A 14" iBook might be easier on their eyes. Ok? The 14" iBook won't die just because we don't like it.

kidA

Sep 18, 2003, 06:48 PM

i've been waiting for ibook updates only because i hate buying at the end of a product cycle, and the ibook's been due for an update for a while. that said, the current ibook doesn't lack anything that i want or need, and the reason i won't buy one is partly because of imminent updates, but also because of price. as an education customer, i can get the 12" PB for $1399 US. the 12" combo drive ibook is $1199 US with the discount. not much difference. if they drop the ibook prices somewhere in the range of $150-$200, i pick one up right away. the ibooks need something. like has been said before, the ibooks just look lousy right now at their prices with the 12" Powerbook just a few hundred bucks above it. since updates appear to be a ways away, a price drop is definitely in order--Apple, are you listening?

airmac

Sep 18, 2003, 07:07 PM

Originally posted by bennetsaysargh
yes!
am i the only one who loves the iBooks?
that will be by first portable. im starting to save up already:)

I have the last model and I love it. I think it's due to the cost issue and we all agree it is not the speed we're after, just the portability. Unfortunaly i can't afford the new powerbooks so i'm waiting for whatever update (mainly bluetooth built-in and airport extreme) with panther preinstalled. Oh and iBooks still boots into os 9..

And imagine....white aluminium case...mmmmmmm...

Makosuke

Sep 18, 2003, 07:08 PM

I think the 14" iBooks are pointless, too, but that doesn't mean everyone does--I bought one for an older fellow who prefered the lower resolution since it was easier on his eyes.

I'm pinching my pennies for a G5, but a friend of mine bought a new 12" G4 about an hour ago. She was about to get a midrange 12" iBook, but the new PowerBooks bumped the refurbed previous generation 12" PBs down to exactly the same price point at the Apple Store, and the metal enclosure and G4 just seems like a better choice for the money.

But, here's hoping for some nice new iBooks soon, since there's obviously plenty of market for them.

QCassidy352

Sep 18, 2003, 07:31 PM

Originally posted by vollspacken
update the iBook to 1.1Ghz and drop the 14" model... noone needs it, since it has no increase in screen resolution. it's just bulky and ugly, drop it...

ah, I was wondering how long we'd go before encountering a 14" ibook bigot. ;)

It's not ugly, it's not bulky, and it exists because people asked for it. :p

Why does no one bi*ch about the 15" imac, which has an even larger screen than the ibook, and the same resolution? Or the Pismo, which had the same screen size and resolution and yet might be Apple's best loved laptop ever?

The 14" ibook is not going anywhere; get used to it. Everyone I know who has actually owned/ used one really likes it (me included). If you don't, who cares? Are you saying Apple should displease customers and lose revenue just because you don't like the look of one of the products? Don't like it, don't buy it. I'll never understand why 14" critics seems personally offended by this machine. :rolleyes:

magitekkn

Sep 18, 2003, 07:36 PM

My girlfriend is about to buy a 14" iBook 900 since we're getting a deal where we can buy it at the same 1199 price point (education) as the 12" iBook 900, same combo drive, 128MB more ram (although we're going to trash it and pickup a 256 or 512 to go in the slot.) and she is more into having the bigger screen than portability (yes she realizes it's the same resolution) her current laptop has a 13.3" XGA screen and she just wants the readability I guess.

But if we were buying retail, we'd probably go 12" PowerBook all the way.

Golem

Sep 18, 2003, 07:38 PM

Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
why not just throw in the 1 gig g4? they got to be getting cheap for apple and now you are only writing for 2 chips,g4 & g5.

They would have to redo the mobo to put in a g4 and its not like they arent going to have to write for the g3 anyway for another 5 years to support older machines. On the other hand a cheap /power efficient 750vx at 1.1 ghz and 1mb l2 cache will probably beat a g4 for applications that dont make good use of altivec.

In the medium term its probably more like they will drop the g4's. ie g3 for consumer G5 for Pro, Both from IBM and zip from motorola.

iEric

Sep 18, 2003, 08:17 PM

wow thats really good to hear..i might get a G3 then..I hope its Airport Extremeable..LOL...
But I'm only getting it if its cheap......Mmm..I dont know..

simX

Sep 18, 2003, 08:17 PM

I don't think the iBook is going above 1 GHz with the next update, because the 12" and 15" G4 PowerBook can have a 1 GHz G4 (although the 15" can also have a 1.25 GHz G4), especially since the iBook has a G3 in it.

Even though Apple has touted the megahertz myth as just a myth (which it is), it still exists in the minds of consumers.

If you point to the iMac, that is a different story, because then you have to compare it to the PowerMac, between which there is now a significant gap in performance. Having the iMac with a faster processor than the PowerBooks is not a problem, because the PowerBooks exist because of portability.

I don't see the iBook being upgraded to a G4 either, since that would really cannibalize 12" PowerBook sales. The 12" PowerBook is kind of like the G4 iMac of the desktop line -- it's sandwiched between the powerful 15" and 17" PowerBooks, and the awesome price/performance ratio of the top-of-the-line iBook which is rivaling the 12" PowerBook in pure performance. The iMac was similarly sandwiched between the PowerMacs, and the awesome bargain that was the eMac. Now that the PowerMac has gone G5, the iMac has a ton of room to grow without encroaching on the PowerMac.

So, aside from maybe a graphics card update, a jump to a 1 GHz G3 with 1 MB L2 cache (perhaps), AirPort Extreme support, maybe a slot-load optical drive, and perhaps a modest price decrease, I don't see the iBook getting a significant update anytime soon. Although, all in all, that wouldn't be half bad as an iBook update. :)

The iBook will see a significant update only after the PowerBook line goes G5, IMHO.

bennetsaysargh

Sep 18, 2003, 08:25 PM

Originally posted by simX
I don't think the iBook is going above 1 GHz with the next update, because the 12" and 15" G4 PowerBook can have a 1 GHz G4 (although the 15" can also have a 1.25 GHz G4), especially since the iBook has a G3 in it.

Even though Apple has touted the megahertz myth as just a myth (which it is), it still exists in the minds of consumers.

If you point to the iMac, that is a different story, because then you have to compare it to the PowerMac, between which there is now a significant gap in performance. Having the iMac with a faster processor than the PowerBooks is not a problem, because the PowerBooks exist because of portability.

I don't see the iBook being upgraded to a G4 either, since that would really cannibalize 12" PowerBook sales. The 12" PowerBook is kind of like the G4 iMac of the desktop line -- it's sandwiched between the powerful 15" and 17" PowerBooks, and the awesome price/performance ratio of the top-of-the-line iBook which is rivaling the 12" PowerBook in pure performance. The iMac was similarly sandwiched between the PowerMacs, and the awesome bargain that was the eMac. Now that the PowerMac has gone G5, the iMac has a ton of room to grow without encroaching on the PowerMac.

So, aside from maybe a graphics card update, a jump to a 1 GHz G3 with 1 MB L2 cache (perhaps), AirPort Extreme support, maybe a slot-load optical drive, and perhaps a modest price decrease, I don't see the iBook getting a significant update anytime soon. Although, all in all, that wouldn't be half bad as an iBook update. :)

The iBook will see a significant update only after the PowerBook line goes G5, IMHO.

all of that is true except for the iBooks not going over 1 Ghz. remember before the powerbooks got updated? they had a 900Mhz iBook, and an 867 PB. people can tell the difference. i would love an altivec enhanced iBook with the foloowing specs.

iBook
14.1 or 12.1 inch screen
G3+
1.0 or 1.1Ghz
Built in BT
airport extreme. USB 2.0
Combo drive. 40 60 or 80GB hard drive.

legacyb4

Sep 18, 2003, 08:47 PM

Agreed.

A nice price adjustment would definitely make the 12" 900 a lot more appealing...

Ditto on the end of the product cycle; while I don't necessarily *need* the new stuff (DVI, USB 2.0, Bluetooth, Extreme) it definitely makes sense to buy forward technology rather than buy backward technology unless the price really merits it.

Cheers.

Originally posted by kidA
i've been waiting for ibook updates only because i hate buying at the end of a product cycle, and the ibook's been due for an update for a while. that said, the current ibook doesn't lack anything that i want or need, and the reason i won't buy one is partly because of imminent updates, but also because of price. as an education customer

Bunzi2k4

Sep 18, 2003, 09:08 PM

gosh i wish i didn't get the powerbook g4 12" 4 months ago... but then again, i did need an update... a 350 mghz g3 imac isn't quite as fast as it seemed to be 3 years ago..... you should see it load up safari! it takes about 20-30 seconds to load up safari and laggs when playing any game now... well my lil sis likes the imac now... mayb the ibook was a better deal.......?

Phil Of Mac

Sep 18, 2003, 09:21 PM

Originally posted by Macrumors
While there have been numerous unverified reports of Altivec-enabled G3s, few reliable reports of this have emerged.

See? Two words for you: Urban Legend.

Originally posted by lmalave
Probably not for a 200MHz speed bump. Besides, I actually like the white iBooks - I think they're much more distinctive than the AluBooks. I mean, companies like Fujitsu and Sharp have metal-cased laptops. But who else has white Pyrex-encased laptops?

I think the glowing Apple logo makes either line distinctive enough. Who else has a glowing logo?

Bunzi2k4

Sep 18, 2003, 09:25 PM

i do i like the glowing logo, on my dad's powerbook, the apple logo is upside down when his laptop is on... my dad's so jellous kuz i'm the only one in the family who has a g4 right now.... but he's gonna get a g5 powerbook once they come out so... i've got another year or so of making fun of him :-P

mathew

Sep 18, 2003, 09:29 PM

I think Apple will just up the speed to 1Ghz, and update the rest of the hardware like USB 2.0. They might also support BlueTooth, with the new line of wireless equipment.

They also need to drop prices by about $200 all the way through the line.

Enter a Raffle for a Powerbook G4 867!! Here! (http://www.eisbox.net/raffle.html)

TMJ1974

Sep 18, 2003, 09:38 PM

How about letting us have the 200Mhz FSB this chip already supports?

I forgot, that's because the PowerBook doesn't have that yet.

An un-tampered with IBM 750 would be very nice in the iBook and would give even the current PBs a serious run for the money. In fact, they'd beat it in everything except that which USES AltiVec.

I guess that's not politically correct though, for the consumer level to be superior to the pro level.

People keep begging for the G4 in the iBook....forget that....when the PB goes G5, give me the "REAL" G3 in the iBook, not the crippled one.

Tim

cooper13

Sep 18, 2003, 09:42 PM

Originally posted by usersince86

12.1" ibook/PowerBook Comparison (w/combo drive):

SAME (essentially)
================
12.1-inch TFT display
1024x768 resolution
512K L2 cache
40GB Ultra ATA/100 drive
Combo Drive (DVD-ROM/CD-RW)
10/100BASE-T Ethernet
Built-in 56K v.92 modem
FireWire 400

DIFFERENCES (iBook --- PowerBook)
==============================
900Mhz G3 --- 1Ghz G4
128MB SDRAM --- 256MB DDR266 SDRAM
ATI Mobility Radeon 7500 (32MB) --- NVIDIA GeForceFXGo 5200 (32MB)
USB 1.1 --- USB 2.0
AirPort ready --- AirPort extreme ready
(No BlueTooth) --- BlueTooth
VGA, S-Video and composite video --- Mini-DVI video out
$1299 --- $1599

DEFINITELY WORTH THE $300 DIFFERENCE (imho)

Again, the iBook has a market, but right now they need updated (or, again, prices need lowered).

In general, I agree. But there is one more difference that a lot of people miss--the software on the iBook vs the PowerBook. For someone who already has a Mac and a software collection, the PowerBook is totally the way to go. But for a switcher (like my mom next week), the iBook is very attractive b/c of the included software (AppleWorks, etc.). That way she can write letters, flyers, etc. without having to buy Office or even just Word.

I can't wait until she gets her iSight set up and we can video chat--she can watch her granddaughter from a thousand miles away!

VIREBEL661

Sep 18, 2003, 09:59 PM

Originally posted by bennetsaysargh
yes!
am i the only one who loves the iBooks?
that will be by first portable. im starting to save up already:)

iBooks ROCK! I might even like the 12" a little MORE than the alu book! Go figure...

bobpensik

Sep 18, 2003, 10:30 PM

Well first of all they are not going to release a iBook that is a 1.1Ghz and has 1Mb L2 Cache because that would mean the thing would be faster then their 12inch PB which is supposed to be the pro line and have more features and be faster, so they are not going to cut into their PB sales by releasing a more powerful iBook yet, unfortnately!!

I agree they will most likely wait till the PB line gets G5 and then they can explore the real potential of the IBM chip!! i mean i read somewhere that the IBM 750 was able to support like 1.1Ghz with dual processors! in a notebook and that was like a year ago or something! IBM really makes good chips, but Apple can't really release a consumer notebooks that would put their pro line to shame!! lol and they can't just pur a G3 in the PB cuz that would be stepping down the processor and would look bad, although it may mean better performance!

Well we will just have to wait and see, all i know is that the iBook has real potential :-)

iEric

Sep 18, 2003, 10:49 PM

Originally posted by bobpensik
Well first of all they are not going to release a iBook that is a 1.1Ghz and has 1Mb L2 Cache because that would mean the thing would be faster then their 12inch PB which is supposed to be the pro line
I dont know if a G4 1Ghz is slower than a 1.1 Ghz G3..I dont think so...

pyrotoaster

Sep 18, 2003, 11:01 PM

Originally posted by iEric
I dont know if a G4 1Ghz is slower than a 1.1 Ghz G3..I dont think so...
The G4's faster in an altivec optimized application. Beyond that, you're in a grey area.

Edit: Of course, system bus, RAM, and etc. are even bigger factors in a close comparison like that.

AidenShaw

Sep 18, 2003, 11:28 PM

Originally posted by iEric
I dont know if a G4 1Ghz is slower than a 1.1 Ghz G3..I dont think so...

If the G3 has a somewhat higher clock rate, and double the *L2* cache - you will find the G3 on top (or at least equal) on lots of tests.

As others have said, only the AltiVec-friendly tests will come out ahead on the G4.

But that's cool, if AltiVec-friendly apps are really important to your productivity. If not, the bigger cache, faster clock, and cheaper G3 will be the "ticket to ride".

And, as others have said, Apple won't do it because they need to push people to the higher profit margin "pro" systems. Can't have the high end "consumer" products beating the low end "pro" products, now can we? Artificial barriers....

mvc

Sep 18, 2003, 11:36 PM

Originally posted by QCassidy352
The 14" ibook is not going anywhere; get used to it. Everyone I know who has actually owned/ used one really likes it (me included). If you don't, who cares? Are you saying Apple should displease customers and lose revenue just because you don't like the look of one of the products? Don't like it, don't buy it. I'll never understand why 14" critics seems personally offended by this machine. :rolleyes:

I think it is because most users prefer more resolution to larger type if they are going to be doing any productive work on their machines, and the general feeling would be that as you have to lug this item around, and its bigger than the 12", it ought to give you more resolution for the extra size & bulk, like most other larger laptops do (i.e 15" Powerbook)

After all, if it had a higher base resolution it could still be run at a lower screen resolution to please those who want bigger text. Then everyone would be happy and the machine would have a decent reason to exist (apart from adding one hours extra battery life).

I don't think therefore that this viewpoint can be classed as bigotry. The 14" is clearly a deliberately crippled machine by comparison to the rest of the Apple portable products, and therefore deserves criticism - or more to the point Apple deserves criticism, as I suspect the real problem lies with them not wanting to infringe on the 15" Powerbook sales space.

nexusb

Sep 18, 2003, 11:38 PM

I love reading all the comments here :)
I have only one question though - When?
I'am waiting for the ibook update so I could order one for my girlfriend. She is asking me everyday now, since I have promised her a new iBook about 3 months ago...sooo any ideas when they will have them?

AidenShaw

Sep 18, 2003, 11:45 PM

Originally posted by nexusb
I'am waiting for the ibook update so I could order one for my girlfriend. She is asking me everyday now, since I have promised her a new iBook about 3 months ago...sooo any ideas when they will have them?

Promise her one for your honeymoon.

:rolleyes:

Bunzi2k4

Sep 19, 2003, 12:18 AM

Originally posted by nexusb
I love reading all the comments here :)
I have only one question though - When?
I'am waiting for the ibook update so I could order one for my girlfriend. She is asking me everyday now, since I have promised her a new iBook about 3 months ago...sooo any ideas when they will have them?
my guess would be in 2-4 months... mayb?.... mayb not?

michael666

Sep 19, 2003, 12:22 AM

Originally posted by iEric
I dont know if a G4 1Ghz is slower than a 1.1 Ghz G3..I dont think so...

If you have a look at http://macspeedzone.com/html/hardware/machine/comparison/portable/powerbook/index.shtml, you'll find that the current 900MHz iBook is faster than the 867 MHz 12" Powerbook in most non-AltiVec applications. Only in AltiVec applications it looses dramatically, but that's obviously the power of the G4.

So IF there was a 1.1 GHz iBook with 2MB L2 cache (and 200 MHz bus?), it'd be clearly faster than the 1 GHz Powerbooks (both 12" and 15"!) in those tests.

What a lovely day for an iBook user like me! :) Apple, please put also a Superdrive and a backlit keyboard in the new iBooks! Personally, I love those gadgets, but I don't care for fast CPUs or FW800/DVI and stuff like that. It would be nice if Apple had a nice low-cost laptop for those people.

Pedro Estarque

Sep 19, 2003, 12:26 AM

OK, so I'm getting tired of altivec. I've used it and it sure does speed up some things ( in my experience Photoshop and OSX GUI are much faster), but at what price?
First of all, I think it goes against the whole RISC chip design's philosophy. It adds complexity to the chip, increasing heat, making it harder to produce and therefore more expensive. If that developing effort was spent in better FPU, Integer, FSB, handling more instructions at a time, etc we could have a much better and cheaper PPC on our macs today.
Besides, you have to teach your developers to code their softwares in a specific way in order to get the speed boost, another example of mislead effort. A developer should focus on the features and productivity of their software, optimization is the compliler's job.
We all know how cool and energy efficient this G3s are. Imagine a dual G3 1.1 Ghz powerbook with 200 MHz FSB, 1MB L2cache per chip and 4.5 hours of battery life. It would toast any G4 in most tasks (except altivec instructions on non MP aware programs ) and probably most x86 laptops as well.

Bunzi2k4

Sep 19, 2003, 12:32 AM

gosh the more and more i read this, the more and more i like the ibook, mayb i'll get one of those next time i need a new computer...

Abstract

Sep 19, 2003, 12:34 AM

For someone who already has a Mac and a software collection, the PowerBook is totally the way to go. But for a switcher (like my mom next week), the iBook is very attractive b/c of the included software (AppleWorks, etc.). That way she can write letters, flyers, etc. without having to buy Office or even just Word.

I forget the answer, and I'm too lazy to check, but don't you need a minimum of approximately a 600MHz G4 to use the iSight? If so, then the iBook is inadequate, right?

The white casing on the iBook........I love it because its different, but I hate the attention it gets (I'm not much of an attention wh0re), and I think its too girly and prissy. Also, the keyboard on the iBook sucks when compared to the PB's. I don't understand why they can't just use the keyboard on the 12" PB and put it into the iBook, but with white keys instead of grey!!

And although I agree with those of you who say that the 12" PB is a much better deal for the money, but some people just don't have the $200-300 extra. No, it may not be alot of money, but some people may struggle just to get the iBook. The biggest difference in cost 12" PB and iBook.........the cost of Applecare. It would cost me approximately $140 Cdn (or $100 USD) more money to buy Applecare. Yes, that's $140 more money, not total cost. That's a big difference. The system would cost me an additional $400-$500 Cdn in order for me to get the 12" PB. Also, the RAM is more expensive.....

About the 14" iBooks.........they have their place. Although they don't provide better resolution, its still bigger and easier to read, which is nice. I have a Windows computer with a 17" CRT, and its running at 1024x768 resolution. Does this mean that I would be just as well off using a 12" monitor?

And the only thing that I don't like the iBook is the lack of USB 2.0. Lets face it, 95% of us don't need APEx or FW800, but USB 2.0 is different. I want to be able to use a new device with USB 2 if I need to 2 years down the road. All I want is a single USB 2 port.

Tequila Grandma

Sep 19, 2003, 12:35 AM

I think the #1 thing the iBooks really need right now is to
GO BACK TO THE OLD CASE!

My 600mhz iBook, with the translucent plastic, looks spectacular. It's truly one of the most attracive portable computers ever made. My mother's new iBook, however, looks like cheap crap in comparison.

Recently, while Apple's designs are certainly better than other computer companies out there, they fail to exicte me in the way they used to. The only two products they currently produce that are absolutely stunning are the new iPod and the iMac. The PowerBooks, while nice looking, look too similar to other products on the market. The front of the PowerMac G5 looks slick, but what the hell is with the side? It's wholly unflattering. And of course, ALL the iBooks, not just the cheap model, have now been crappified with the solid white plastic.

I'm starting to think that Apple will never again reach the height of beautiful deign that they did in the Summer of 2000. At that point, the PowerMacs were using the most attractive cases they ever had, the iMacs had just been given incredibly fantastic-looking new darker colors (ruby, sage, and indigo), a very short-lived but nevertheless amazingly gorgeous CRT was introduced, the iBooks were still fruity and playful, the PowerBook G3 was just as sexy as ever, and finally, there was the cube :)

That period of Mac design, was not quite as bright and outrageous as the original color designs, nor was it as cold and clean as the new designs. The look was a perfect compromise between the fun and the professional. Apple's products simply don't feel special in the way they used to :(

Sorry for the long rant, but the sad appearance of the current iBooks brought it out. Apple normally takes such pride in their designs, so it's rather disappointing that they would cheapen the look of one of their popular products in order to cut the price. I'd personally pay a hefty sum just to have a computer that looks better than all the rest, and the iBook USED to - not anymore. At least the OS still looks nice, but nowhere near as nice as 10.1 -- oops, that's another rant :)

Joshua305

Sep 19, 2003, 12:45 AM

Does the fact that the GX will run at < 8.0 W @ 1 GHz and have a 20% larger die size create a problem for use in a laptop?

Bunzi2k4

Sep 19, 2003, 12:53 AM

Originally posted by Tequila Grandma
I think the #1 thing the iBooks really need right now is to
GO BACK TO THE OLD CASE!

My 600mhz iBook, with the translucent plastic, looks spectacular. It's truly one of the most attracive portable computers ever made. My mother's new iBook, however, looks like cheap crap in comparison.

Recently, while Apple's designs are certainly better than other computer companies out there, they fail to exicte me in the way they used to. The only two products they currently produce that are absolutely stunning are the new iPod and the iMac. The PowerBooks, while nice looking, look too similar to other products on the market. The front of the PowerMac G5 looks slick, but what the hell is with the side? It's wholly unflattering. And of course, ALL the iBooks, not just the cheap model, have now been crappified with the solid white plastic.

I'm starting to think that Apple will never again reach the height of beautiful deign that they did in the Summer of 2000. At that point, the PowerMacs were using the most attractive cases they ever had, the iMacs had just been given incredibly fantastic-looking new darker colors (ruby, sage, and indigo), a very short-lived but nevertheless amazingly gorgeous CRT was introduced, the iBooks were still fruity and playful, the PowerBook G3 was just as sexy as ever, and finally, there was the cube :)

That period of Mac design, was not quite as bright and outrageous as the original color designs, nor was it as cold and clean as the new designs. The look was a perfect compromise between the fun and the professional. Apple's products simply don't feel special in the way they used to :(

Sorry for the long rant, but the sad appearance of the current iBooks brought it out. Apple normally takes such pride in their designs, so it's rather disappointing that they would cheapen the look of one of their popular products in order to cut the price. I'd personally pay a hefty sum just to have a computer that looks better than all the rest, and the iBook USED to - not anymore. At least the OS still looks nice, but nowhere near as nice as 10.1 -- oops, that's another rant :)

hey i have the indigo imac from summer 2000!! it's as slow as heck now, but i too liked the old ibook look better, but the compact design of the new ones are cool too... but i don't like white that much.....

Edot

Sep 19, 2003, 01:06 AM

The PowerBooks, while nice looking, look too similar to other products on the market.

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't it the other products that look too similar to the PowerBook?:rolleyes:

Rincewind42

Sep 19, 2003, 01:14 AM

Originally posted by Pedro Estarque
OK, so I'm getting tired of altivec. I've used it and it sure does speed up some things ( in my experience Photoshop and OSX GUI are much faster), but at what price?
First of all, I think it goes against the whole RISC chip design's philosophy. It adds complexity to the chip, increasing heat, making it harder to produce and therefore more expensive. If that developing effort was spent in better FPU, Integer, FSB, handling more instructions at a time, etc we could have a much better and cheaper PPC on our macs today.
Besides, you have to teach your developers to code their softwares in a specific way in order to get the speed boost, another example of mislead effort. A developer should focus on the features and productivity of their software, optimization is the compliler's job.
We all know how cool and energy efficient this G3s are. Imagine a dual G3 1.1 Ghz powerbook with 200 MHz FSB, 1MB L2cache per chip and 4.5 hours of battery life. It would toast any G4 in most tasks (except altivec instructions on non MP aware programs ) and probably most x86 laptops as well.

1) Altivec is designed around a RISC philosophy. RISC is generally taken as Reduced Instruction Set Complexity. The generally accepted definition of that is to have well designated units with large register sets and a load/store architecture. Altivec is designed to integrate well into such a philosophy.

2) Everything adds complexity to a chip. Larger on-die L2 caches add complexity. Being able to dispatch more instructions per clock adds complexity. Better Integer, Floating point, Branch units add more complexity. Faster front side busses add more complexity. Compared to making any of those systems better, adding Altivec is (relatively) a snap because the biggest issue with adding Altivec is laying out the chip so that 128 bits arrive at the correct time instead of 32 or 64 bits. Improving your FPU, Integer, or Branch unit by contrast usually involves redesigning that unit. Improving the Load/Store unit (and by extension the FSB) is a matter of timing and signaling, and the smallest error gets you bad data or a system hang. So while Altivec adds complexity to a chip, so does nearly any other improvement.

3) Nothing happens in a vacuum! When we got the G4, we also got a better Floating point unit. Why didn't Motorola make a better FSB? Probably because it wasn't a concern when the G4 ran at 400Mhz on a 100Mhz bus. And when Motorola decided they cared more about embedded than desktop, there was never any pressure to make a better FSB. It was probably luck that we got any improvements beyond Mhz on the 7450 because by then Motorola was in full money saving mode. If you look at the G5, it has all the same features that the G4 offers, but is so much better because the engineering was put into it. The fact that it has Altivec didn't detract from that engineering effort.

4) You don't need to know Altivec to take advantage of it! That's why Apple writes to much Altivec code. The entire system uses it on OS X. It's this simple: if you have a G4 or G5 Mac, your always using Altivec for something to your advantage. Apple even offers simple libraries for developers to use that provides optimal code for G3/G4/G5, so you don't even need to write the code yourself to make it optimal. Many times the compiler can't create optimal code for you. It's the good old Garbage In Garbage Out. A developer that completely ignores performance does so at the loss of customers because far more people will use the fast app that does 90% of what they want than use the slow app that does 100%. And there are some damn simple things I can do that will cause a 3Ghz machine to slow to a crawl. Do it a little differently, and a 200Mhz machine can outpace it. Optimization does not end at the compiler.

5) Ya know, a dual G3 laptop would be pretty cool. But it will never happen. People have screamed about how bad the Dual G4s are with FSB, and ya know what? A Dual G3 will have the same problems. And no, I doubt that your theoretical laptop will have 4.5 hours of battery life just like now. The 750GX has the same power usage characteristics as the 750FX. Your dual G3 probably won't toast the G4 due to memory bandwidth restrictions. It would likely operate as a single G3 in the same circumstances. And Apple wouldn't give you a 200Mhz FSB because the PowerBooks only have a 167 max.

Truthfully, anyone who thinks that the new iBook rev will be more than a single 1.1Ghz G3 running on a 100Mhz bus is having a pipe dream. And it is far more likely that it will be a 1Ghz G3 that they put in the top line machine. Yes, the iBook had a 900 Mhz G3 while the PowerBook had an 867Mhz G4. But that is 33 Mhz. A top of the line iBook with a 1.1 G3 is 100 Mhz over the 12" which I think is enough to cause confusion, which is why Apple won't do it.

So many people have been come G4 haters because of Motorola's screw ups. If IBM hadn't taken the G3 in, it would probably had the exact same issues (or worse, Motorola could have refused to make it at all). Don't hate the G4 because Motorola didn't exert the effort to keep the engineering staff that would have made it better, or spent the money to make it better. The iBook will eventually get a chip branded as a G4 - be it a G3+Altivec (the urban legend) or G4s that Apple buys from Motorola is irrelevant, as eventually the G3 will become a footnote in Macintosh history. It's somewhat amazing that it's lived on in the iBook for as long as it has.

nexusb

Sep 19, 2003, 01:15 AM

Originally posted by Bunzi2k4
my guess would be in 2-4 months... mayb?.... mayb not?

That will double the lifecycle of this product though. 2-4 months meens I better get one now.. too bad.

And as for the honeymoon present...teher are better toys I would think :eek:

Phil Of Mac

Sep 19, 2003, 01:21 AM

Originally posted by Rincewind42
1) Altivec is designed around a RISC philosophy. RISC is generally taken as Reduced Instruction Set Complexity.

At the risk of seeming petty and pedantic, it actually stands for Reduced Instruction Set Computer.

Originally posted by Rincewind42
The iBook will eventually get a chip branded as a G4 - be it a G3+Altivec (the urban legend) or G4s that Apple buys from Motorola is irrelevant, as eventually the G3 will become a footnote in Macintosh history. It's somewhat amazing that it's lived on in the iBook for as long as it has.

I think it'll skip to the G5 :)

edenwaith

Sep 19, 2003, 01:30 AM

Now THIS is what I've been waiting for. The last upgrade for the iBooks was quite a yawner. Nothing astounding or interesting there. From several other product lines over the years, the last incarnation of a tired and worn out line precedes an amazing new version. The last CRT iMac upgrade was mostly small processor speed bumps, but then ~6 months later the flat-panel iMac was released. The last G4 PowerMac? Not overly thrilling there either, and it seems from reports, the high-end community wasn't overly amazed either. Now the G5 PowerMac.

So is it time for something new and great to happen to the iBooks? I think so. Do I honestly think it will happen? Not really. My lowly guess would be some smaller enhancements like the USB 2, Airport Extreme, MAYBE FW 800 on the higher end iBook, and that would be about it. It seems that the PowerBook's trump card now is the G4 chip, and until the PB goes dual processor (what a battery drain that could be) or has a G5, the iBook might remain a G3 for at least another generation or few. Otherwise, the iBook and PB lines are starting to come a little too close in features, which might (or might not) butcher some of the PB sales.

speechgod

Sep 19, 2003, 01:46 AM

I have a pretty modest wishlist for the next iBook:

1) 133Mhz FSB (100Mhz is beyond outdated.)
2) 1 Ghz CPU
3) The ability to hold more than 640 RAM.
4) The old case back.

That's all I want. And is it so much to ask? Everything else is fine.

splashman

Sep 19, 2003, 01:48 AM

Originally posted by mvc
I think it is because most users prefer more resolution to larger type if they are going to be doing any productive work on their machines, and the general feeling would be that as you have to lug this item around, and its bigger than the 12", it ought to give you more resolution for the extra size & bulk, like most other larger laptops do (i.e 15" Powerbook)

That's a pro user's perspective. To the average user, a bigger screen is a bigger screen. The iBook is a consumer machine, and Apple wouldn't have released it if it there wasn't a perceived need, and they wouldn't still be selling it if it wasn't selling. Isn't this self-evident? How is it that you know more about the customer's needs than Apple?

After all, if it had a higher base resolution it could still be run at a lower screen resolution to please those who want bigger text. Then everyone would be happy and the machine would have a decent reason to exist (apart from adding one hours extra battery life).

Please! Have you ever read text on an LCD that wasn't at its native resolution? Give me a break!

I don't think therefore that this viewpoint can be classed as bigotry. The 14" is clearly a deliberately crippled machine by comparison to the rest of the Apple portable products, and therefore deserves criticism - or more to the point Apple deserves criticism, as I suspect the real problem lies with them not wanting to infringe on the 15" Powerbook sales space.

The term "bigotry" is appropriate, if you knew the definition, and your use of the term "deliberately crippled" only proves the point. Before you criticize Apple, take a marketing class. Geez.

Tequila Grandma

Sep 19, 2003, 02:05 AM

Originally posted by Bunzi2k4
hey i have the indigo imac from summer 2000!! it's as slow as heck now, but i too liked the old ibook look better, but the compact design of the new ones are cool too... but i don't like white that much.....
Oh, I think you might have misconstrued what I wrote. While I LOVE the look of the old colorful iBooks, they were very bulky. The iBook I have is a white 600mhz/combo drive model that was first announced in late 2001 (although I bought it after the Macworld SF price drop), and it looks wonderful - even better than the colored ones. The model I hate, however, are the brand new ones that use an opaque white plastic rather than a translucent plastic with white underneath.

Originally posted by Edot
Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't it the other products that look too similar to the PowerBook

While the idea of a sleek silvery looking laptop may have been popularized by the PowerBook G4, I always felt that the original titanium G4 has a unique look to it that the imitations couldn't match. The new aluminum models, however, actually look more like the Powerbook rip-offs than the titanium Powerbook did. As far as functionality goes, the aluminum models are a superior design (primarily becuase of the ease of side ports rather than back ones), but in terms of asthetics, it's simply not as striking as the titanium model is. At a time when Apple is getting more noticed because of the success and praise of things like OS X and the iPod, I would think that they would want to be as distinctive as possible in their design, yet they seem to be moving towards a more normal, toned down look.

Of course, IMO, the translucent white iBooks and the Pismo G3s were far more attractive than any G4 PowerBook.

chazmox

Sep 19, 2003, 02:05 AM

Originally posted by TMJ1974
How about letting us have the 200Mhz FSB this chip already supports?

I forgot, that's because the PowerBook doesn't have that yet.

An un-tampered with IBM 750 would be very nice in the iBook and would give even the current PBs a serious run for the money. In fact, they'd beat it in everything except that which USES AltiVec.

I guess that's not politically correct though, for the consumer level to be superior to the pro level.

People keep begging for the G4 in the iBook....forget that....when the PB goes G5, give me the "REAL" G3 in the iBook, not the crippled one.

Tim

I was wondering when someone was going to mention the bus speed. A 1.1 GHz G3 with a 1 Mb L2 and the FSB at 200 MHz ( the chip is spec'ed from IBM at this ) would most likely be faster than the new 7457 that the Powerbooks use. If IBM could find a way ( around the legal not technical challenges ) to put Altivec into the processor, then you have your G4 killer.

Or rather you have a IBM G4 that kills the Mot one...

edenwaith

Sep 19, 2003, 02:08 AM

To reiterate what many others have mentioned, a price drop would be great for the iBooks. I think the ultimate iBook price with features would be under $1000 with a Combo CD-RW/DVD-ROM and at least a 30 GB hard drive, and around 1 GHZ processor. Up to 1 GB of RAM would also be nice, but I survived quite well with "only" 320 MB of RAM in my iBook, which is only half of the theoretical limit of the iBooks now, I believe.

If Apple was to produce a lower priced iBook, around $799, like the low-end eMac, that might boost their sales a bit in that area, since that is a place where Apple does not seem to have much of a foot hold (for various good reasons)-- cheap, cheap computers. A person can buy a $500 Dell computer with system unit, speakers, keyboard, mouse, and a monitor, yet it is hardly a top-of-the-line machine. But for Ma and Pa, it should work just fine for them.

edenwaith

Sep 19, 2003, 02:12 AM

Originally posted by Abstract
I forget the answer, and I'm too lazy to check, but don't you need a minimum of approximately a 600MHz G4 to use the iSight? If so, then the iBook is inadequate, right?

I just checked. You were half-right. It requires a "Macintosh computer with a 600MHz or faster PowerPC G3 or any PowerPC G4 or G5 processor ".

macphoria

Sep 19, 2003, 02:29 AM

I love reading all the comments here
I have only one question though - When?
I'am waiting for the ibook update so I could order one for my girlfriend. She is asking me everyday now, since I have promised her a new iBook about 3 months ago...sooo any ideas when they will have them?
Last update was April. So I would guess October, November at the latest.

macphoria

Sep 19, 2003, 02:37 AM

CrackedButter

Sep 19, 2003, 02:43 AM

For the price and size of the 14", it would be nice if it had a card slot. Setting it apart from the 12".

Same as they do with the powerbooks.

Falleron

Sep 19, 2003, 03:06 AM

How about they drop both the 12" and the 14" and combine the line into a new 13" display. That way, apple saves on manufacturing costs + compromises on a good size screen. I would buy a 13" ibook.

true777

Sep 19, 2003, 03:12 AM

JW Pepper

Sep 19, 2003, 03:23 AM

I think it would make a lot of sense for Apple to just go with a 13" and higher resoloution. It could then offer just two options. With BT built in.

40gb Combo

80Gb DVD-R.

A 1.1ghz G3 with 1mb L2 can easily handle the rendering.

The costs reductions involved in the economy of scale would help compensate for the larger screen size. The market Apple is aiming for is education and in order to suceed they need to offer something equal or better than Dell.

singletrack

Sep 19, 2003, 03:42 AM

Originally posted by chazmox
If IBM could find a way ( around the legal not technical challenges ) to put Altivec into the processor, then you have your G4 killer.

What legal challenges?

IBM already has VMX, their version of AltiVec, in the G5 and the instruction set is available to all in the AIM alliance. The challenges are purely technical. If we ever see a 750VX 'Mojave' which is rumoured to include VMX and start at 1.4Ghz then it would cream the current G4, especially with a 200Mhz FSB and 1MB L2. I don't think we'd see a chip like that until the G5 is down to 90nm process and running low power/2Ghz in a Powerbook though.

However, all this talk about using the 750GX is premature surely with IBM saying the chip won't be in production until December and it'll consume 8W instead of the 750FXs 5.4W.

If there is a new iBook 'soon', I'd bet on it still being a 750FX at 900Mhz but with USB2, Airport Extreme, maybe Bluetooth built in but that's a pro feature IMHO, maybe 256MB base RAM because 128MB is just silly with OSX, but that's about it.

I fail to see why you'd need FW800 even on a pro laptop never mind the iBook. What are you going to do with it? Attach a Firewire RAID storage device? FW400 is still way quicker than USB2 and both are way quicker than an external drive can deliver.

Chrisse

Sep 19, 2003, 05:27 AM

I'd like to see the new iBook with aluminium/magnesium case, but still white of course. :D

hvfsl

Sep 19, 2003, 05:36 AM

What graphics do you think the ibook would have, I am thinking ether Radeon 9000 or Geforce FX5200. The current Radeon 7500M is faster than the Geforce 420go in the old 12 PBs, so I am hoping they do not use that.

mvc

Sep 19, 2003, 07:08 AM

Originally posted by splashman
That's a pro user's perspective. To the average user, a bigger screen is a bigger screen. The iBook is a consumer machine, and Apple wouldn't have released it if it there wasn't a perceived need, and they wouldn't still be selling it if it wasn't selling. Isn't this self-evident? How is it that you know more about the customer's needs than Apple?

Apple, like most companies, release products not to meet a perceived user need or provide an optimal solution, but to fill a perceived or existing market niche.

I imagine many users don't even know that they are just buying bigger pixels when they buy the 14", most would assume that bigger = more because that is the general tendency in larger screens. The fact than many would not realise or notice that they did not get that added value doesn't make Apples actions any less cynical. If anything, it makes it worse.

I cannot think of any other manufacturer selling two laptops of two different sizes with the same base resolution - don't kid yourself, its a crock. And if you CAN find another manufacturer, then that's two crocks. Does this make it right? Its right for Apple.

Please! Have you ever read text on an LCD that wasn't at its native resolution? Give me a break!

OK, thats a valid point, but it isn't a real objection - Most apps and the system allow you to control the point size of the text and the icon size in the finder to suit your taste and eyesight, and the more pixels you have to play with in general the better, so thats a minor objection to the benefits of having more resolution.

The term "bigotry" is appropriate, if you knew the definition, and your use of the term "deliberately crippled" only proves the point. Before you criticize Apple, take a marketing class. Geez.

Wrong - Marketing is what I do, and my whole point is that Apple has exactly addressed a real market niche, an niche combined of those who genuinely prefer the bigger text, and ALSO those who know no better or worse are frankly mislead - so addressing that niche doesn't make their methods and motivations somehow benevolent. They exist for profit, not your benefit, and so actions like deliberately crippling a product or processor range for instance CAN be and are completely in accordance with maximising that profit.

Apple is not some sacred cow that never does wrong and exists for the betterment of mankind. They have more vision and humanity than many companies, but the bottom line rules.

There are many posts in this forum discussing why the G3 ibook is not "allowed" to exceed the speed of the G4 Powerbooks for "marketing" reasons. There was one earlier in this thread. Wouldn't you like a faster iBook, perhaps faster than the Powermac in pure GHz at least, why do you think they are not?

They must consider their overall profit margins, the powerbooks make more money for them and to maintain the aura of a professional product they must appear superior to the "consumer" model on all points. This is also why the top pro desktop machines are faster than the top iMacs, not because it HAS to be so. (G5 issues aside).

As for bigotry - I have always found the people most likely to use words like bigot and idiot in a post are those with the least real substance to their arguments - try intelligent reasoned discussion instead of emotive terms of abuse and you will get more respect.

orion123

Sep 19, 2003, 07:47 AM

Sheesh, I've never seen a 14" bigot before, but apparently we have one here.

I bought a 14" iBook, and I'm a VERY technical person. I love it. I wouldn't go 12" (though I can see why some would) and oddly enough, many of my tech-savvy friends own 14" iBooks as well. We just really like them and Apple sells a ton. If you want to convince me I'm wrong, go ahead, but I'm the one making the choice.

murak

Sep 19, 2003, 07:53 AM

Wow, many opinions, I say greate

Well, bennetsaysargh, you are not the only one. I´ve been waiting for a 1 ghz iBook since the 800 mhz came out and I´m still stuck with my "pice-of-****"-wintel.

But please people, don´t start any rumours about the new iBook getting Altivec, it will not. Yes, there is a version of the 750GX with Altivec planned but I´m almost sertain that it will not be in the next iBook. It would cost more, drain more battery and it´s also a commersial thing; "Altivec is for PB". Besides, we (who whant iBook) don´t need it. Only programs that suport it can
take advantidge of it and those programs are, if I´m not mistaken, Photoshop & co. If you plan to use Photoshop & co professionaly you should get the PB, couse if you can afford Photoshop, you can afford a PB. And like airmac said, it´s not speed we´re after, just a greate notebook.

About the 14" iBook, they don´t apeal to me either, but I think many people buy them. Even in my small home town I heard about 3 people getting a 14". And don´t forget, it has the longest battery life of all mac portables.

Also, I also don´t think the next iBook will be 1.1 ghz, it will be 1 ghz. That way it will still be clear to most people that PB is more powerfull than iBook and Apple can ugrade the iBook line once more (updates=new customers) before it´s time for a new CPU design.

And I don´t think iBook will be updated sometime soon, after all IBM has been saying that the 750GX woun´t go in production before dec -03. http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/products/powerpc/newsletter/jun2003/newproductfocus.html

Joshua305, no it´s no problem, it´s still more "lowpower" than the G4.

Dang, Rincewind42, you go girl! Really good post, I aploud you!

speechgod, I agree.

Jan/Feb -04

White iBook case
1 ghz G3 1 mb cache
133 mhz buss (IF PB G5 is out) If not, I´m gonna overklock it to 133. Fact.
128 onboard ram
40-60 gb HD
Radeon 9000 32 mb (think low cost)

And that is my opinion, not facts.

jouster

Sep 19, 2003, 08:30 AM

Originally posted by singletrack
What legal challenges?

IBM already has VMX, their version of AltiVec, in the G5 and the instruction set is available to all in the AIM alliance. The challenges are purely technical. If we ever see a 750VX 'Mojave' which is rumoured to include VMX and start at 1.4Ghz then it would cream the current G4, especially with a 200Mhz FSB and 1MB L2. I don't think we'd see a chip like that until the G5 is down to 90nm process and running low power/2Ghz in a Powerbook though.

However, all this talk about using the 750GX is premature surely with IBM saying the chip won't be in production until December and it'll consume 8W instead of the 750FXs 5.4W.

If there is a new iBook 'soon', I'd bet on it still being a 750FX at 900Mhz but with USB2, Airport Extreme, maybe Bluetooth built in but that's a pro feature IMHO, maybe 256MB base RAM because 128MB is just silly with OSX, but that's about it.

I fail to see why you'd need FW800 even on a pro laptop never mind the iBook. What are you going to do with it? Attach a Firewire RAID storage device? FW400 is still way quicker than USB2 and both are way quicker than an external drive can deliver.

I would go a little further: the challenge would be getting Apple to use the resulting chip, which would, of course, be better and/or faster then the G4. It would be a little embarrassing to have the consumer portable line suddenly leapfrog the pro line.

Perhaps it is as simple as waiting for the G5 PowerBooks to be released. That way Apple retains the pro/consumer disparity.

splashman

Sep 19, 2003, 08:39 AM

Originally posted by mvc
I imagine many users don't even know that they are just buying bigger pixels when they buy the 14", most would assume that bigger = more because that is the general tendency in larger screens. The fact than many would not realise or notice that they did not get that added value doesn't make Apples actions any less cynical. If anything, it makes it worse.

Sigh. "...did not get that added value..." Here's a multiple-choice question for you: Compared to 12" screens of the same resolution, are 14.1" screens (a) more expensive, or (b) the same cost?

Obviously the consumers know the answer.

Your assumption that some percentage of buyers have been implicitly or explicitly deceived is baseless speculation.

Wrong - Marketing is what I do, and my whole point is that Apple has exactly addressed a real market niche, an niche combined of those who genuinely prefer the bigger text, and ALSO those who know no better or worse are frankly mislead - so addressing that niche doesn't make their methods and motivations somehow benevolent. They exist for profit, not your benefit, and so actions like deliberately crippling a product or processor range for instance CAN be and are completely in accordance with maximising that profit.

News flash: a company makes a profit by delivering a desirable product. A market economy works because companies have financial incentives to deliver what consumers want. If you are correct in your belief that Big Bad Apple is somehow deceiving poor, helpless consumers into buying inferior products, then Apple will suffer financially, and will deserve to do so.

What's amazing to me is that none of these alleged victims have posted complaints. Every post on this board by 14" owners have been positive. Perhaps Apple deliberately crippled the victims' internet connections as well?

Apple is not some sacred cow that never does wrong and exists for the betterment of mankind. They have more vision and humanity than many companies, but the bottom line rules.

For the record, I don't trust any organization that claims to exist for the betterment of mankind. A market economy is the only moral economy, IMHO. As I said, the market will determine if Apple is delivering a desirable product, and Apple will adjust by making their products more desirable and maximizing their profits, thus ensuring their survival. Rock on Apple!

There are many posts in this forum discussing why the G3 ibook is not "allowed" to exceed the speed of the G4 Powerbooks for "marketing" reasons. There was one earlier in this thread. Wouldn't you like a faster iBook, perhaps faster than the Powermac in pure GHz at least, why do you think they are not?

You speak as if (a) Apple has no right to choose their marketing strategy to maximize profits, (b) you have no choice of which computer to buy, and (c) you want something for nothing.

If you want a faster iBook, pay for it -- get a Powerbook. If you don't like the trade-offs inherent in Apple's products or marketing, there are a thousand other choices, each with their own set of trade-offs. Apple is free to position their products as they see fit, and you and I are free to take them or leave them.

You seem to be of the opinion that Apple makes too much profit. If any entity other than the market determines acceptable profit margins, everyone suffers -- corporations and consumers alike. This is Econ 101.

I'm not saying Apple can do no wrong. Whine about their products all you like. I've got my own set of complaints. But I'm not about to claim that Apple is somehow being unfair or deceptive or greedy because their choices don't mesh with my sophomoric wish list.

They must consider their overall profit margins, the powerbooks make more money for them and to maintain the aura of a professional product they must appear superior to the "consumer" model on all points. This is also why the top pro desktop machines are faster than the top iMacs, not because it HAS to be so. (G5 issues aside).

Call 1-800-421-WAAH.

mvc

Sep 19, 2003, 08:40 AM

Originally posted by orion123
Sheesh, I've never seen a 14" bigot before, but apparently we have one here.
… If you want to convince me I'm wrong, go ahead, but I'm the one making the choice.

Ahh the 'b' word again.

A bigot is someone blindly and obstinately devoted to party or creed, or a blind zealot. I am hearing lots of use of the term recently from people who seem to be showing exactly that behaviour. :D

Its a very handy term to fling around when someone has a few good reasons for not liking something and you cannot be bothered finding a solid counter argument, almost as handy as calling someone a "n@zi".

Good for you, I hope you enjoy the bigger size, I've have tried both, I purchased the 12" iBook. I wish it had even more pixels, and if the 14 had a few more, I probably would have bought that. It does get an extra hours battery life.

But, in the interests of further discussion, please, tell me if anyone can find a 14" CURRENTLY in production by any of Apples major competitors which only displays 1024 x 768 pixels. Then you'll have some facts to hit me over the head with. :p Find half a dozen and I'll take off my white pointy hood and extinguish the burning cross! :rolleyes:

mvc

Sep 19, 2003, 09:02 AM

Originally posted by splashman Sigh. "...did not get that added value..." Here's a multiple-choice question for you: Compared to 12" screens of the same resolution, are 14.1" screens (a) more expensive, or (b) the same cost?

Presumably more expensive, as there is a $200 price difference between the two models for virtually no gain. Go check the website. You are paying a lot more for those bigger pixels.

Perhaps Apple deliberately crippled the victims' internet connections as well?

Touche :p

You speak as if (a) Apple has no right to choose their marketing strategy to maximize profits, (b) you have no choice of which computer to buy, and (c) you want something for nothing.

No, I want something for my extra $200. You see it as a feature. I see it as a rip off.

I'm not about to claim that Apple is somehow being unfair or deceptive or greedy because their choices don't mesh with my sophomoric wish list.

Now I am a sophomore, because I don't feel this machine is good value compared to its smaller peer? A little dramatic I think!

:rolleyes:

airmac

Sep 19, 2003, 09:02 AM

Originally posted by Abstract
I forget the answer, and I'm too lazy to check, but don't you need a minimum of approximately a 600MHz G4 to use the iSight? If so, then the iBook is inadequate, right?

The white casing on the iBook........I love it because its different, but I hate the attention it gets (I'm not much of an attention wh0re), and I think its too girly and prissy. Also, the keyboard on the iBook sucks when compared to the PB's. I don't understand why they can't just use the keyboard on the 12" PB and put it into the iBook, but with white keys instead of grey!!

And although I agree with those of you who say that the 12" PB is a much better deal for the money, but some people just don't have the $200-300 extra. No, it may not be alot of money, but some people may struggle just to get the iBook. The biggest difference in cost 12" PB and iBook.........the cost of Applecare. It would cost me approximately $140 Cdn (or $100 USD) more money to buy Applecare. Yes, that's $140 more money, not total cost. That's a big difference. The system would cost me an additional $400-$500 Cdn in order for me to get the 12" PB. Also, the RAM is more expensive.....

About the 14" iBooks.........they have their place. Although they don't provide better resolution, its still bigger and easier to read, which is nice. I have a Windows computer with a 17" CRT, and its running at 1024x768 resolution. Does this mean that I would be just as well off using a 12" monitor?

And the only thing that I don't like the iBook is the lack of USB 2.0. Lets face it, 95% of us don't need APEx or FW800, but USB 2.0 is different. I want to be able to use a new device with USB 2 if I need to 2 years down the road. All I want is a single USB 2 port.

I like your comment, it put's things into perspective. Now that Powerbooks got updated, of course the 12 inch iBook is not so attractive isn't it? I would like to point 2 things why I own the iBook: i like the feel of it and i'm in love with white...:D

splashman

Sep 19, 2003, 09:11 AM

Originally posted by mvc
Ahh the 'b' word again.

A bigot is someone blindly and obstinately devoted to party or creed, or a blind zealot. I am hearing lots of use of the term recently from people who seem to be showing exactly that behaviour. :D

No argument on the overuse of that term, but try looking beyond the primary definition in the dictionary. My Oxford-American says "narrow-minded or intolerant". Not entirely inappropriate, IMHO.

But, in the interests of further discussion, please, tell me if anyone can find a 14" CURRENTLY in production by any of Apples major competitors which only displays 1024 x 768 pixels. Then you'll have some facts to hit me over the head with. :p Find half a dozen and I'll take off my white pointy hood and extinguish the burning cross! :rolleyes:

Let's assume there are no comparable products on the market. So what do we have? Apple is selling a product that nobody else is selling. Apparently people are actually buying them, and what little anecdotal evidence we have suggests that their owners are happy with their purchase.

Okay, now, type really slow so I can understand: where's the problem?

splashman

Sep 19, 2003, 09:26 AM

Originally posted by mvc
Presumably more expensive, as there is a $200 price difference between the two models for virtually no gain. Go check the website. You are paying a lot more for those bigger pixels.

"Virtually no gain"? So, those who pay the extra $200 are idiots -- paying for nothing? Please! Just because it's no added value to you doesn't mean that's true for everyone. You already admitted that "some" would value the larger pixels. Since the only difference between the two models is screen size and battery life, I would contend that pixel size is the main draw to the 14" model. Get over it.

Now I am a sophomore, because I don't feel this machine is good value compared to its smaller peer?

I imagine you're a very thoughtful and insightful individual. But you sound sophomoric when you whine about Apple's priorities not being the same as your own.

edenwaith

Sep 19, 2003, 09:38 AM

Originally posted by mvc

They exist for profit, not your benefit, and so actions like deliberately crippling a product or processor range for instance CAN be and are completely in accordance with maximising that profit.

Apple is not some sacred cow that never does wrong and exists for the betterment of mankind. They have more vision and humanity than many companies, but the bottom line rules.

Ultimately, I would like to believe, that Apple is in business for more than just to earn a buck. Otherwise, why really bother? I like the Omnigroup's philosophy of importance of a business (in decreasing order): Create good software; make money; have fun.

Yes, Apple is a business and they need to make money, or else they won't survive. But considering the love and drive put into their products, I think there is that strong element to make good (great) products, both hardware and software.

Nicky G

Sep 19, 2003, 10:05 AM

It's funny, I really like the look of the "new" white iBooks. I liked the old ones too, but the new, what do they call it, opaque look is pretty sweet.

And any guy who thinks "white is girly" needs to see a shrink for inferiority complex issues. White is cool, and plenty manly. But then again, I'm comfortable with my sexuality, as I'm willing to bet the majority of American men are not.

Hmm

Sep 19, 2003, 10:24 AM

Maybe people don't remember when the 12" iBook was introduced. Everybody loved it, but a big complaint about it was the difficulty reading the screen. Even the magazine reviews referenced it. Yes, they said, you could scale the resolution back to 800x600, but it looked lousy since it wasn't the native resolution.

The 14" model wasn't some crazy ripoff scheme dreamed up by Apple. It was designed to appeal to the exact market that was complaining about the screen readibility when the 12" model came out. I'm no marketing major, but it sounds to me like when you've got a customer base wanting a particular product, then it makes sense to try to build it if you think you'll make money off it. It looks like that's what Apple did, and many people like me who bought the 14" model are very happy they did it.

Keep in mind that portability is only one aspect of a laptop. Mine lives in the house all the time and only occasionally travels from room to room. I mostly use it on the couch. The extra lb of weight isn't that big a deal to me, but I'm looking at that screen all the time, so the size and readability are of more importance to me. If I was a college student lugging the thing around all the time, I'd definitely go with the smaller model.

Either way, even the 14" model is still lighter than my indigo clamshell, with better resolution and a bigger screen. :)

Maxx Power

Sep 19, 2003, 10:26 AM

Did anyone notice the 15 inch AlumBook has 24bit audio subsystem ? I red their developers Pdf for both 17 and 15 inch, and it appears the 15 inch got this feature first, and no other powerbook or ibook has this yet.

Rincewind42

Sep 19, 2003, 10:35 AM

Originally posted by Maxx Power
Did anyone notice the 15 inch AlumBook has 24bit audio subsystem ? I red their developers Pdf for both 17 and 15 inch, and it appears the 15 inch got this feature first, and no other powerbook or ibook has this yet.

Actually, I think that may be a typo (in the 17" PB technote). There are other oddities in that document (like the Superdrive in teh 15" being superior to the one in the 17") that lead me to believe that it was kind rushed.

splashman

Sep 19, 2003, 10:42 AM

Originally posted by Hmm
Keep in mind that portability is only one aspect of a laptop. Mine lives in the house all the time and only occasionally travels from room to room. I mostly use it on the couch. The extra lb of weight isn't that big a deal to me, but I'm looking at that screen all the time, so the size and readability are of more importance to me. If I was a college student lugging the thing around all the time, I'd definitely go with the smaller model.[/B]

Good clarification about different needs. Personally, I bring my 14" to a few business meetings, but mostly it stays on my wife's desk, where she uses it for Quicken and a few games. In that regard, it's a small, quiet desktop machine. Before we got it, we looked at both side-by-side, and my wife nixed the 12" screen after about 2 seconds.

As you said, different needs lead to different choices. And it's great to have those choices.

Rincewind42

Sep 19, 2003, 10:43 AM

Originally posted by murak
But please people, don´t start any rumours about the new iBook getting Altivec, it will not. Yes, there is a version of the 750GX with Altivec planned but I´m almost certain that it will not be in the next iBook. It would cost more, drain more battery and it´s also a commersial thing; "Altivec is for PB".

If there is a version of the G3 with altivec planned, IBM hasn't said anything publically about it. Personally, I think it is fiction. But altivec doesn't necessarily cause more power draw. If you look at the 970, the Altivec unit is a drop in the bucket compared to most of the other logic on the chip.

Besides, we (who want iBook) don´t need it. Only programs that suport it can
take advantidge of it and those programs are, if I´m not mistaken, Photoshop & co.

Misinformation. Every program on the system makes use of the Altivec unit, in one way or the other, although only a few do so directly. Generally, only those programs that are designed for speed in the first place tend to use Altivec to an extent that it matters, but one of those programs is your operating system =).

Dang, Rincewind42, you go girl! Really good post, I applaud you!

Hmm... I'm not certain how I should feel about that :confused: . I'll just say thanks for the applause.

mkaake

Sep 19, 2003, 11:29 AM

Originally posted by mvc
Apple, like most companies, release products not to meet a perceived user need or provide an optimal solution, but to fill a perceived or existing market niche.

I imagine many users don't even know that they are just buying bigger pixels when they buy the 14", most would assume that bigger = more because that is the general tendency in larger screens. The fact than many would not realise or notice that they did not get that added value doesn't make Apples actions any less cynical. If anything, it makes it worse.

I cannot think of any other manufacturer selling two laptops of two different sizes with the same base resolution - don't kid yourself, its a crock. And if you CAN find another manufacturer, then that's two crocks. Does this make it right? Its right for Apple.

OK, thats a valid point, but it isn't a real objection - Most apps and the system allow you to control the point size of the text and the icon size in the finder to suit your taste and eyesight, and the more pixels you have to play with in general the better, so thats a minor objection to the benefits of having more resolution.
<snippy snip>

*cough*

my sister bought the 14 (against my pleadings, because of the size and portability of the 12 incher), BECAUSE it was 1024 x 768 at 14 inches. people really tend to forget what the 'average' user is these days - like everyone saying that because they didn't like single button mice, the bt mouse and keyboard were going to be the biggest flop since lisa.

good golly, do you know how many people i know with 17 inch monitors at 1024 x 768? my grandparents keep their 17 at a painfull 800x600...

the 14 has it's place, even though that place is not with me.

as for a 13, it will never happen. a ton of people buy the 12 incher purely based on it's size - it's small, it's light, it's durable.

make it bigger, there are *some* (not everyone) people who wouldn't want it anymore.

matt

iPC

Sep 19, 2003, 11:30 AM

My guess for the next 12" iBook update:

same G3 but at 1GHz
200MHz bus
Airport Extreme
BlueTooth
256MB RAM on motherboard
combo drive
40GB hdd
$1199

Current gen G3 goes to 1GHz with 200MHz bus. Might as well use it now...

Would be nice if the next 14" had a higher resolution screen, but I seriously doubt that will happen.

mkaake

Sep 19, 2003, 11:35 AM

Originally posted by mvc
Ahh the 'b' word again.

<snip>

But, in the interests of further discussion, please, tell me if anyone can find a 14" CURRENTLY in production by any of Apples major competitors which only displays 1024 x 768 pixels. Then you'll have some facts to hit me over the head with. :p Find half a dozen and I'll take off my white pointy hood and extinguish the burning cross! :rolleyes:

i am writing this on a compaq evo n610c, which has a 14 inch screen and a max resolution of 1024x768.

oh, and it's the standard issue laptop for everyone who works at GM and gets a laptop.

*cough*

matt

mkaake

Sep 19, 2003, 11:42 AM

okay, i haven't even left hp's website yet...

hp ze4401
hp ze4501
hp ze 4420
hp ze4502
hp ze4430
hp ze4402
hp ze5501

etc etc etc.

oh, and fwiw, a bunch of those are 15 inchers.

guess you can take off that funny hat, huh?

matt

<edit>

or you could go to sony's website - their consumer (and we are talking about the apple consumer machine, remember) machines... the vaio frv28 is 15 inches and 1024 x 768...

oh, the dell inspiron 5100, 1100; lattitude d600.. blah blah blah

do you want me to keep going, or have you realized that this board isn't the best place to get the general idea of what's *normal*

again, like everyone saying that the BT keyboard and mouse would surely die a quick death because *no one* wants/needs/uses a single button mouse... hmm - check out the stories on macbytes.com today...

so please, before you think that something commonly said around here is true, step out of it for a minute and research what you're saying...

matt

illumin8

Sep 19, 2003, 11:46 AM

Originally posted by macphoria
1MB L2 Cache? Wow. This thing is going to kick some major booty!
My thoughts exactly. A 1MB L2 cache on a 1.1ghz G3 processor would probably blow away a Motorola 7457 processor (the ones currently in the new powerbooks).

Clock for clock the G3 w/ 1MB L2 vs. the G4 w/ 512k L2 I would expect to see the G4 handily beat, except of course in programs that are Altivec optimized.

Dave K

Sep 19, 2003, 12:08 PM

Originally posted by mvc
But, in the interests of further discussion, please, tell me if anyone can find a 14" CURRENTLY in production by any of Apples major competitors which only displays 1024 x 768 pixels. Then you'll have some facts to hit me over the head with. :p Find half a dozen and I'll take off my white pointy hood and extinguish the burning cross! :rolleyes:

To join in the fun,

From what I can see, nearly all of Toshiba Canada's notebook output at all screen sizes is at 1024X768

http://www.toshiba.ca/web/products.grp?lg=en&section=1&group=1

Much higher than that becomes hard on the eyes for most users.

Higher res screens is a niche market offering that really only appeals to people who work with products that throw a pile of pallets on the screen. I'd wager that the vast majority of non-widescreen consumer laptop screens you'd find on the shelf at Best Buy/CompUSA/Pick Your favourite local retailer are at 1024X768.

chacha75

Sep 19, 2003, 01:00 PM

My one wish would actually be for the iBooks to get *smaller* - at least offer a smaller version. Something like a subnotebook, but relatively full-featured. Like a 10" for $ 699 with CD-ROM. Just perfect for grade school kids, teens, or anyone who just needs a cheap little machine to write notes on or check email on the road, but does their real work on a desktop machine.

But I know it's not going to happen, of course, just dreamin'.

You know...I saw a NEC or Toshiba notebook (can't remember which company) with a 12" widescreen at 1280x786 resolution and the dot pitch was absolutely beautiful. I would really like to see a PB/iBook or some new line with this type of screen. I would also be totally fine to have an external firewire CD/DVD-RW to get a Mac under 3.5 lbs. Even though my iBook is under 5 lbs, it still hurts my shoulder/back after over an hour commute on a crowded train...

chacha

patmcfar8

Sep 19, 2003, 01:07 PM

Originally posted by splashman
I imagine you're a very thoughtful and insightful individual. But you sound sophomoric when you whine about Apple's priorities not being the same as your own.

LOL! That may actually be the most true and profound statement I've ever read on a Mac board.

Splashman, if you would allow it, I'd like to make that my signature.

I would like to add one thing to this disscussion: I believe that when Apple and IBM are able to get the G5 into the powerbook, we may see them drop the G4 all togethor and impliment whatever the lateset version of the G3 is... if it truly is better. ;)

hayesk

Sep 19, 2003, 01:12 PM

Originally posted by mvc
, an niche combined of those who genuinely prefer the bigger text, and ALSO those who know no better or worse are frankly mislead - so addressing that niche doesn't make their methods and motivations somehow benevolent.

Sorry, but that's BS. I have a friend who has been developing software for MacOS X since it came out, and used to program NeXTStep software before that. He also does Windows development. i.e. - he is technically savvy. He bought a 14" iBook. I asked why not the 12" - he said simply, I want bigger pixels. He knew exactly what he was getting and chose it on purpose. I have also heard people claiming after seeing a 12" screen that it was too hard to see.

Why is it so hard for you to believe that some people (even technology-savvy people) want 1024x768 at a larger size?

Phil Of Mac

Sep 19, 2003, 01:34 PM

Originally posted by mvc
Presumably more expensive, as there is a $200 price difference between the two models for virtually no gain. Go check the website. You are paying a lot more for those bigger pixels.

Lots of people are gladly willing to pay a lot more for bigger pixels. You're not.

SO DON'T BUY ONE, YOU CHUMP!

Originally posted by mvc
Now I am a sophomore, because I don't feel this machine is good value compared to its smaller peer? A little dramatic I think!

I suggest you should look up "sophomoric" in the dictionary. It doesn't mean you're a sophomore.

Phil Of Mac

Sep 19, 2003, 01:40 PM

Originally posted by patmcfar8
I would like to add one thing to this disscussion: I believe that when Apple and IBM are able to get the G5 into the powerbook, we may see them drop the G4 all togethor and impliment whatever the lateset version of the G3 is... if it truly is better. ;)

Nahh...I think they'll put a low-GHz G5 in the iBook and a high-GHz G5 in the PowerBook.

That's what they did with the G3.

JrbM689

Sep 19, 2003, 01:41 PM

In response to all the talk on the single button Wireless Mouse, I was thinking of an Apple branded metallic 2-button mouse with some sort of uniquely colored laser to light the surface.

If not the above product, I was thinking of integrating a 1 and 2 button mouse TOGETHER. It would look basically like the current one but would left click by tilting diagonally left and right click by tilting diagonally right. There would be a switch on the bottom of the mouse (similar to the current circular one) to select either multibutton or single. It would change the mechanism inside to then only have a single forward down click. You can read more about this mouse in the next issue of:
"Things I Wish Actually Happened"
-Norm Macdonald was hilarious on SNL Weekend Update

Tequila Grandma

Sep 19, 2003, 01:54 PM

Originally posted by iPC
My guess for the next 12" iBook update:

same G3 but at 1GHz
200MHz bus
Airport Extreme
BlueTooth
256MB RAM on motherboard
combo drive
40GB hdd
$1199

Current gen G3 goes to 1GHz with 200MHz bus. Might as well use it now...
Add "Original translucent case" to this list, and this would be the perfect update. However, I don't really think it'll happen, at least not at that price. Apple will keep using 128mb of RAM standard on the iBook because a lot of consumers don't even know what RAM is, and therefore it's an easy way to cut costs. However, I personally think that limiting the RAM on the iBooks to 128 by default is not a good move. OS X runs like crap on only 128 mb of RAM, but give a regular user a little bit more (256), and they'll have all the RAM they'll ever really need for what they do, but if you give them 128, the RAM will get filled in a minute, and then the computer will run incredibly slow - to many "switchers" who don't know that the miniscule amount of RAM is their problem, they'll simply deduce that "Macs are sooo slow - I was stupid for getting one, and I won't do it again".

I think that it would be a great idea to up the RAM on the motherboard to 256, even if that means a small price increase.

iPC

Sep 19, 2003, 02:02 PM

Originally posted by chacha75
You know...I saw a NEC or Toshiba notebook (can't remember which company) with a 12" widescreen at 1280x786 resolution and the dot pitch was absolutely beautiful. I would really like to see a PB/iBook or some new line with this type of screen. I would also be totally fine to have an external firewire CD/DVD-RW to get a Mac under 3.5 lbs. Even though my iBook is under 5 lbs, it still hurts my shoulder/back after over an hour commute on a crowded train...

chacha
Fujitsu has a few different widescreens available...

http://www.fujitsupc.com/www/productbridge_pseries.shtml

I know a guy with the P2120 and it is a sweet little machine. Dual boot setup (winxp and redhat). Fast enough machine to compile 2.6.0(pre4) kernel while watching a DVD, w/o frame drops! Comes with modular bay (optical drive or 2nd battery), and makes my 12" iBook look like a big bloated beast!

Photorun

Sep 19, 2003, 04:28 PM

I know a guy with the P2120 and it is a sweet little machine. Dual boot setup (winxp and redhat). Fast enough machine to compile 2.6.0(pre4) kernel while watching a DVD, w/o frame drops! Comes with modular bay (optical drive or 2nd battery), and makes my 12" iBook look like a big bloated beast!

WTF? This ain't peecee forums, want to sell peecees find some Wintel circle jerk out there, this is a Mac forum! Not to mention that crappy Fujiwhatsits notebook is even quite a bit more expensive then the iBook starting at $1500 and up, you don't even get a friggin' CD drive until you go up another $100 from that. Hell, the Powerbook 12 bitchsmacks that machine for about the same price, why get a craptacular machine when you can get an original. Sure if you want one of your boots to be XP but unless you're on smack that's just plain stupid.

simX

Sep 19, 2003, 05:11 PM

Originally posted by chacha75
Even though my iBook is under 5 lbs, it still hurts my shoulder/back after over an hour commute on a crowded train...

chacha

Sounds like someone's never been to high school or college, where you often have to carry around 20+ pounds of books in your backpack. :rolleyes:

I'm not trying to offend or anything here (especially if you have some sort of condition that makes your back incredibly sensitive), and I definitely think that Apple should continue to try to lessen the weight of their portables, but 5 pounds is not back-breaking, by any means. Taking out the CD drive to create a "subnotebook" is just dumb, IMHO.

true777

Sep 19, 2003, 05:15 PM

Originally posted by Photorun
WTF? This ain't peecee forums, want to sell peecees find some Wintel circle jerk out there, this is a Mac forum! Not to mention that crappy Fujiwhatsits notebook is even quite a bit more expensive then the iBook starting at $1500 and up, you don't even get a friggin' CD drive until you go up another $100 from that. Hell, the Powerbook 12 bitchsmacks that machine for about the same price, why get a craptacular machine when you can get an original. Sure if you want one of your boots to be XP but unless you're on smack that's just plain stupid.

The point is, some of us would actually like a *smaller*, lighter iBook -
something ultra-light and compact like a subnotebook, but relatively full-featured and elegant, not to menion cheap. A spiffy, tiny thing.

The PC references are just to underscore that this can be done, and that Apple could do it with the iBook. Since Apple doesn't have a machine for this niche out, we obviously can't reference Apple :rolleyes:

I still think that this would be a great new niche for the iBook - both as an absolute entry machine for school kids, and as an unltra-lightweight choice for folks who do all their serious stuff on a desktop and want an ultra-compact machine for email and word processing while on the road.

Since there are quite successful machines like this out in the PC world, that's what folks have been mentioning here. If you ride a bullet train in Japan, you'll see folks in every car typing away on their super-slim, tiny, cool sub-notebooks, so it would be just great if Apple would add a model like this to their iBook lineup - and with Ive's best-of-class industrial engineering, they could probably fit a pretty full-featured feature set inside.

true777

Sep 19, 2003, 05:22 PM

Originally posted by simX
...

5 pounds is not back-breaking, by any means. Taking out the CD drive to create a "subnotebook" is just dumb, IMHO.

There definitely is a market for this, even if you're not personally interested (look at my Japanese train reference above). If they made the screen 10" or so, they could probably fit a CD-ROM drive and still keep it very small and light.

See, us girls don't like to log around big ugly backpacks... it would be great to have a little thing you could actually have on you all the time, but that's still a reasonably featured notebook. I would buy a 3.6 lb 10" iBook for $ 699 or 799 right away... the reason I still don't have an iBook or PB is that they're still too big for me. I'd like something tiny, and I don't think I'm the only one.

BTW - unrelated remark - wouldn't the XServe be due for an update even before the iBook?

macMaestro

Sep 19, 2003, 06:56 PM

Here's my guesses for what Apple's lineup will look like come June 2004... Or more like what I hope Apple's lineup will look like.

GOBI eMac

3 models:
1.0 Ghz CD/RW $599
1.0 Ghz Combo $799
1.2 Ghz Superdrive$1099

GOBI iBook

3 models:
1.0 Ghz 12" CD/RW $799
1.0 Ghz 12" Combo $999
1.2 Ghz 14" Superdrive $1299

GOBI iMac

2 models:
1.2 Ghz 12" Combo $1299
1.4 Ghz 17" Superdrive $1799

G5 PowerBook

4 models:
1.4 Ghz 12" Combo $1599
1.4 Ghz 12" Superdrive $1799
1.6 Ghz 15" Superdrive $2599
1.6 Ghz 17" Superdrive $2999

G5 PowerMac

3 Models:
2.6 Ghz $1999
2.8 Ghz $2399
Dual 3.0 Ghz $2999

PLUS:

GOBI Cube
1.2 Ghz Combo $1099
1.2 Ghz Superdrive $1299
1.4 Ghz Superdrive $1499

The first five items I think can actually happen if not almost definitly will happen (Dual 3.0 Ghz G5). The last item is pure wish. ;)

chacha75

Sep 19, 2003, 08:02 PM

See, us girls don't like to log around big ugly backpacks... it would be great to have a little thing you could actually have on you all the time, but that's still a reasonably featured notebook. I would buy a 3.6 lb 10" iBook for $ 699 or 799 right away... the reason I still don't have an iBook or PB is that they're still too big for me. I'd like something tiny, and I don't think I'm the only one.

Yes, there is definately a market for this! I am actually living in Japan and see a LOT of these 10" subnotebooks being used. A lot have a very fine resolution to boot (1024x786 is standard).

Sounds like someone's never been to high school or college, where you often have to carry around 20+ pounds of books in your backpack.

Yes, but I prefer not to do it any more now that I'm out of school...it may not be backbreaking to carry around only an iBook but I do happen to have other things with me and anything I can do to lighten the load would help...:D

ChaCha...

Phil Of Mac

Sep 19, 2003, 08:11 PM

Originally posted by macMaestro
Here's my guesses for what Apple's lineup will look like come June 2004... Or more like what I hope Apple's lineup will look like.

You're not as optimistic as I would be :)

My estimate is posted below due to a dumb mistake that I made.

Phil Of Mac

Sep 19, 2003, 08:14 PM

Sorry. I meant to hit edit but I hit quote instead.

eMac
G4 Processor (Motorola)
1.33 GHz (Combo): $599
1.42 GHz (SuperDrive): $699
Low-cost educational system. Due to unreliable chip production, all G4's will be reserved for this line only, ensuring a somewhat reliable supply. Product line marked for cancellation in near future as the G5 improves in price-performance.

iBook
G5 Processor
10":
1.2 GHz Combo: $799
1.4 GHz SuperDrive: $899
12":
1.4 GHz Combo: $899
1.6 GHz SuperDrive: $999
14":
1.4 GHz Combo: $1099
1.6 GHz SuperDrive: $1199
Popular educational system. Also a popular personal system. Like the original iBook, which coexisted with Lombard and Pismo, this iBook shares the same processor type with the PowerBook. Widescreen. New enclosure.

iMac
G5 Processor
SuperDrive
17"
3 GHz
$1299
Reduced to a single product at a single attractive price point, incidentally that of the original Bondi Blue iMac. 17" screen only--15" screens are marked for extinction. Includes the same optical audio out that the G5 has today--ideal system for home entertainment. Evolved enclosure (compare the Kihei iMacs to the original Bondi iMacs and you'll see what I mean)

PowerBook G5
SuperDrive Standard
12"
1.8 GHz
$1599
2.0 GHz
$1799
15"
2.0 GHz
$1999
2.5 GHz
$2199
17"
2.5 GHz
$2599
More aggressive price cuts. Performance same across line, except for the 12" due to heat problems. All screens are widescreen. New enclosure.

Power Mac G5
Dual 2.5 GHz: $1599
Dual 3.0 GHz: $1999
Dual 3.33 GHz: $2199
There is no single processor. Price drops to $1599 for a Dual 2 GHz, the same entry-level price as the Blue and White G3. The 3.33 GHz is IBM overachieving. IBM promised a 1.8 GHz 970 and we got 2 GHz. If they promised Apple 3.0 GHz, there's a good chance they'll overshoot that one too. Same enclosure, possibly slightly modified.

Notes:
G5 Processors will be at either 90 nm or 60 nm, allowing their use in notebooks.

Price for the G5 processor will be low because IBM can mass-produce them cheaply at Fishkill.

All products except the eMac will use a G5 version of the Universal Motherboard Architecture. R&D costs for this UMA will be spread across the entire product line.

The eMac will be Apple's only product without a widescreen display. It will be the odd one out. Apple will use it to make a full frontal assault on the educational market to take it back.

The G6 will be released at Macworld Expo San Francisco in the year 2005.

Sun Baked

Sep 19, 2003, 08:43 PM

I wonder if the iBook will stick with the current Pangea's SDR chipset or opt to switch to the Intrepid's DDR chipset...

mvc

Sep 19, 2003, 10:49 PM

Originally posted by mkaake
okay, i haven't even left hp's website yet...

hp ze4401
hp ze4501
hp ze 4420
hp ze4502
hp ze4430
hp ze4402
hp ze5501

etc etc etc.

oh, and fwiw, a bunch of those are 15 inchers.

guess you can take off that funny hat, huh?

mvc

Sep 19, 2003, 11:29 PM

Originally posted by chacha75
Yes, there is definately a market for this! I am actually living in Japan and see a LOT of these 10" subnotebooks being used. A lot have a very fine resolution to boot (1024x786 is standard).

Now thats a machine I would like Apple to make. :p

iShater

Sep 20, 2003, 03:00 AM

murak

Sep 20, 2003, 10:20 AM

Originally posted by Rincewind42
If there is a version of the G3 with altivec planned, IBM hasn't said anything publically about it. Personally, I think it is fiction. But altivec doesn't necessarily cause more power draw. If you look at the 970, the Altivec unit is a drop in the bucket compared to most of the other logic on the chip.

Yes, I was wrong, after looking it up it was just a rumor. But still, it doesn´t sound right to compare a G3 and a G5 when it comes to power draw. I don´t have the facts but I picture that Altivec makes more difference (when it comes down to total power draw) on G3 than on G5. Right, no?

Originally posted by Rincewind42

Misinformation. Every program on the system makes use of the Altivec unit, in one way or the other, although only a few do so directly. Generally, only those programs that are designed for speed in the first place tend to use Altivec to an extent that it matters, but one of those programs is your operating system =).

Again, I am wrong. Yes, OSX does use Altivec. BUT :D does it make a big difference? Again I picture that the mojor factors that make OSX faster is RAM, Cache and a good 3D card. Right, no?

Originally posted by Rincewind42

Hmm... I'm not certain how I should feel about that :confused: . I'll just say thanks for the applause. :D

You will have to exuse my bad english, I thought that it was a nice thing to say. Sorry

Rincewind42

Sep 20, 2003, 12:26 PM

Originally posted by murak
Yes, I was wrong, after looking it up it was just a rumor. But still, it doesn´t sound right to compare a G3 and a G5 when it comes to power draw. I don´t have the facts but I picture that Altivec makes more difference (when it comes down to total power draw) on G3 than on G5. Right, no?

Relatively speaking, yes the Altivec unit would add a larger % power draw on a G3 than on a G5, but in absolute terms I think the L2 cache draws about the same amount of power.

Again, I am wrong. Yes, OSX does use Altivec. BUT :D does it make a big difference? Again I picture that the mojor factors that make OSX faster is RAM, Cache and a good 3D card. Right, no?

Except perhaps on the G5 it is nearly impossible to saturate the RAM bus without Altivec. So yes, the implication that has is that I don't think the G3 can saturate it's system bus (probably a really big reason why Apple hasn't upgraded the iBook to DDR Ram). In getting bit to the screen, the video card does mean more than the CPU, but there are specific tasks that can't be done on the GPU, and those will be faster on a machine with a G4 than a G3. And pretty much anything that talks to Quicktime will be faster on a G4 than on a G3 (which is probably more than you think).

You will have to exuse my bad english, I thought that it was a nice thing to say. Sorry

No big deal. It's not that it isn't a nice thing to say, it's just something you usually say to a girl :p

yojimbo

Sep 20, 2003, 01:45 PM

>Except perhaps on the G5 it is nearly impossible to saturate the RAM bus without Altivec. So yes, the implication that has is that I don't think the G3 can saturate it's system bus (probably a really big reason why Apple hasn't upgraded the iBook to DDR Ram). In getting bit to the screen, the video card does mean more than the CPU, but there are specific tasks that can't be done on the GPU, and those will be faster on a machine with a G4 than a G3. And pretty much anything that talks to Quicktime will be faster on a G4 than on a G3 (which is probably more than you think).

Agreed. But I found that the cost of using SDR is now more than DDR since SDR is no longer demanding as DDR at this moment. (Though retail price of DDR may still be ahead the SDR) Though DDR won't improve the overall performance very much, Apple may change to DDR in iBook, cost effective. Also as a way to fool user that they have improved the speed alot though they just increase a 100 mhz in the future CPU upgrade.

Anyway very nice post Rincewind42!!

Abstract

Sep 20, 2003, 11:32 PM

Sorry for going offtrack, but for those who hope that Apple lowers the price of the iBook, I'd like to say that I hope they don't. The iBook is already at a great price. If they cut the price of the iBook, then they may cut corners during production or something. I'm not quite sure what to say except that the money they cut has to come from somewhere, and I hope that it isn't from the iBook's themselves.

Also, a smaller notebook would cost more than a bigger one, while a 10" would definitely be expensive. Apple is one of the few companies that would make a compact laptop like the iBook cheaper than the bigger systems. I think that's great, and I just wanted to point that out.

Also, why can't the iBook get the G4 as well sans the "pro" features like Bluetooth, FW800, USB 2.0 and APEx?? Why can't we have a 12" and 14" iBook with a G4 1GHz AND have a 12" PB with the 1GHz they recently announced? If the only differentiator between the iBook and PB are the "pro" features, then so be it. Keep the resolution where it is for all I care.........I don't. I'd rather the iBook use the G4 if it will result in a faster machine.

macphoria

Sep 21, 2003, 01:48 AM

JSRockit

Sep 21, 2003, 02:09 PM

I'm thinking we'll see a redesigned iBook with a 1Ghz G3 at MWSF.
I hope they either kill the 14" model or give it SXGA+ resolution.

lmalave

Sep 21, 2003, 02:42 PM

Originally posted by true777
There definitely is a market for this, even if you're not personally interested (look at my Japanese train reference above). If they made the screen 10" or so, they could probably fit a CD-ROM drive and still keep it very small and light.

See, us girls don't like to log around big ugly backpacks... it would be great to have a little thing you could actually have on you all the time, but that's still a reasonably featured notebook. I would buy a 3.6 lb 10" iBook for $ 699 or 799 right away... the reason I still don't have an iBook or PB is that they're still too big for me. I'd like something tiny, and I don't think I'm the only one.

BTW - unrelated remark - wouldn't the XServe be due for an update even before the iBook?

The abovementioned Fujitsu is a 10.6" widescreen, and it's about 3 1/2 pounds with optical drive. I think it's still about a thousand pixels wide, too, so all you're really giving up is a little bit of vertical screen space. Thing is, though, the 12" size really hits a sweet spot in terms of size - they're selling quite a few of both the 12" iBooks and 12" PowerBooks. So I think a 10" would have to be in addition to 12", not a replacement for it. If they came out with a 10.6" widescreen iBook that would definitely be my next laptop purchase, though. For me a 10.6" widescreen would be perfect since I do mostly web browsing, text editing, and iTunes. So basically, I'd just have to doe a bit more scrolling is all...

JSRockit

Sep 21, 2003, 02:51 PM

Originally posted by lmalave
The abovementioned Fujitsu is a 10.6" widescreen, and it's about 3 1/2 pounds with optical drive. I think it's still about a thousand pixels wide, too, so all you're really giving up is a little bit of vertical screen space. Thing is, though, the 12" size really hits a sweet spot in terms of size - they're selling quite a few of both the 12" iBooks and 12" PowerBooks. So I think a 10" would have to be in addition to 12", not a replacement for it. If they came out with a 10.6" widescreen iBook that would definitely be my next laptop purchase, though. For me a 10.6" widescreen would be perfect since I do mostly web browsing, text editing, and iTunes. So basically, I'd just have to doe a bit more scrolling is all...

The Fujitsu P5000 actually has better resolution than the iBook...it is just smaller at 10.6". The iBook is 1024x768. The Fujitsu is 1280 x 768. It is almost as good of res as the 15" pBook. However, the extra vertical res of the pBook makes a huge difference.

Macco

Sep 21, 2003, 04:59 PM

Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
Sorry. I meant to hit edit but I hit quote instead.

eMac
G4 Processor (Motorola)
1.33 GHz (Combo): $599
1.42 GHz (SuperDrive): $699
Low-cost educational system. Due to unreliable chip production, all G4's will be reserved for this line only, ensuring a somewhat reliable supply. Product line marked for cancellation in near future as the G5 improves in price-performance.

iBook
G5 Processor
10":
1.2 GHz Combo: $799
1.4 GHz SuperDrive: $899
12":
1.4 GHz Combo: $899
1.6 GHz SuperDrive: $999
14":
1.4 GHz Combo: $1099
1.6 GHz SuperDrive: $1199
Popular educational system. Also a popular personal system. Like the original iBook, which coexisted with Lombard and Pismo, this iBook shares the same processor type with the PowerBook. Widescreen. New enclosure.

iMac
G5 Processor
SuperDrive
17"
3 GHz
$1299
Reduced to a single product at a single attractive price point, incidentally that of the original Bondi Blue iMac. 17" screen only--15" screens are marked for extinction. Includes the same optical audio out that the G5 has today--ideal system for home entertainment. Evolved enclosure (compare the Kihei iMacs to the original Bondi iMacs and you'll see what I mean)

PowerBook G5
SuperDrive Standard
12"
1.8 GHz
$1599
2.0 GHz
$1799
15"
2.0 GHz
$1999
2.5 GHz
$2199
17"
2.5 GHz
$2599
More aggressive price cuts. Performance same across line, except for the 12" due to heat problems. All screens are widescreen. New enclosure.

Power Mac G5
Dual 2.5 GHz: $1599
Dual 3.0 GHz: $1999
Dual 3.33 GHz: $2199
There is no single processor. Price drops to $1599 for a Dual 2 GHz, the same entry-level price as the Blue and White G3. The 3.33 GHz is IBM overachieving. IBM promised a 1.8 GHz 970 and we got 2 GHz. If they promised Apple 3.0 GHz, there's a good chance they'll overshoot that one too. Same enclosure, possibly slightly modified.

Notes:
G5 Processors will be at either 90 nm or 60 nm, allowing their use in notebooks.

Price for the G5 processor will be low because IBM can mass-produce them cheaply at Fishkill.

All products except the eMac will use a G5 version of the Universal Motherboard Architecture. R&D costs for this UMA will be spread across the entire product line.

The eMac will be Apple's only product without a widescreen display. It will be the odd one out. Apple will use it to make a full frontal assault on the educational market to take it back.

The G6 will be released at Macworld Expo San Francisco in the year 2005.

Wait, you forgot the video iPod, and the new G5 cube, and the tablet/notebook thingie, and the Apple-branded phone, and the return of the Newton, and...

Phil Of Mac

Sep 21, 2003, 06:29 PM

Originally posted by Macco
Wait, you forgot the video iPod, and the new G5 cube, and the tablet/notebook thingie, and the Apple-branded phone, and the return of the Newton, and...

I was trying to be realistic.

I also predict Apple will have at least one new product or service that none of us can see coming.

macphoria

Sep 21, 2003, 06:35 PM

Wait, you forgot the video iPod, and the new G5 cube, and the tablet/notebook thingie, and the Apple-branded phone, and the return of the Newton, and...
Video iPod: Maybe
G5 Cube: Not gonna happen
Tablet: Not gonna happen
Apple Phone: Not gonna happen
PDA: Not gonna happen

Something else: Definitely

JSRockit

Sep 21, 2003, 07:20 PM

Just remember that 10" laptops are generally more expensive than 12" laptops...so the dream of a 10" laptop cheaper than $999 isn't going to happen. The Fujitsu P5000 starts at $1599 and the Sony TR1/2 starts at $1999.

iPC

Sep 22, 2003, 11:38 AM

Originally posted by JSRockit
Just remember that 10" laptops are generally more expensive than 12" laptops...so the dream of a 10" laptop cheaper than $999 isn't going to happen. The Fujitsu P5000 starts at $1599 and the Sony TR1/2 starts at $1999.
P2120 starts at $1299. Also there is not a lot of competition in the US for this niche, so prices have remained rather stable (and high).

tom.96

Sep 22, 2003, 11:55 AM

iPC

Sep 22, 2003, 12:09 PM

Originally posted by tom.96
Has anyone else seen the report on macworld.co.uk that the new ibooks will have a G4 500 CPU and a 15" screen? Mworld UK is a pretty good site, but seems like a strange new ibook lineup. If I was buying one, I would be more attracted to a 14" 1.1ghz G3 than a G4 500...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/32945.html

http://macworld.co.uk/news/top_news_item.cfm?NewsID=6935

Must be a slow week for macworld.co.uk

This is the most ridiculous thing ever. The current 900MHz G3 iBook is faster in nearly everything than the 500MHz G4 is..... :rolleyes:

murak

Sep 22, 2003, 12:11 PM

Originally posted by tom.96
Has anyone else seen the report on macworld.co.uk that the new ibooks will have a G4 500 CPU and a 15" screen? Mworld UK is a pretty good site, but seems like a strange new ibook lineup. If I was buying one, I would be more attracted to a 14" 1.1ghz G3 than a G4 500...

I read all of it and it is proboably just a rumour, though it got me on my toes! It most be a rumor and not a "mistake" (I gues you all remember the G5 specs that leaked out..)

macphoria

Sep 22, 2003, 01:29 PM

Has anyone else seen the report on macworld.co.uk that the new ibooks will have a G4 500 CPU and a 15" screen? Mworld UK is a pretty good site, but seems like a strange new ibook lineup. If I was buying one, I would be more attracted to a 14" 1.1ghz G3 than a G4 500...
I don't think this will happen for two reasons. One, Apple knows most consumers are concerned about clockspeed, therefore it will not update iBook with slower clockspeed, even if it is G4. Second, big attraction for iBook is its small form factor. It does not make sense that they'll make it bigger.

Adamki2000

Sep 23, 2003, 10:47 PM

I don't think we'll be seeing a G5 iBook anytime soon seeing as how the G4 iBook isn't even out yet. Plus, with Apple having cooling issues with the G5 processor in laptops, it's likely that we'll probably see them in Powerbooks sometime mid to late next year and probably will make their way to iBooks in 2005. This is, I think, being realistic, given Apple's history of how and when they update their hardware lines. As for the iBooks' design, I actually love it. It's nice, clean, simple, soft-looking, and actually very pretty I think. I'd be happy if they didn't change the design at all. As for bigger screens, I'd have to agree and say that a 15" screen would probably be the biggest screen size Apple would go with for what is meant to be an education-targeted user group that have less income than people who can afford the Powerbooks. I would definitely like to see VRAM upgrades, but I think what would truly be an innovation for Apple would be for the new video cards in their laptops to be swappable when newer/faster ones come out. Of course you could always possibly do a complete motherboard upgrade to gain more CPU speed and possibly RAM as well but I think having the VRAM embedded onto the motherboard itself is a serious drawback to people who are always looking to upgrade their systems to make them faster and better. I could see how embedding the VRAM forces users to have to buy whole new laptops when theirs become outdated but come on, the main reason I HAVEN'T bought a laptop yet is because of the fact that you can't swap out the processors or VRAM. Other than that nitpick, I think Apple is doing right with their consumer notebook line. :-)

Phil Of Mac

Sep 24, 2003, 12:34 AM

Originally posted by Adamki2000
I don't think we'll be seeing a G5 iBook anytime soon seeing as how the G4 iBook isn't even out yet. Plus, with Apple having cooling issues with the G5 processor in laptops, it's likely that we'll probably see them in Powerbooks sometime mid to late next year and probably will make their way to iBooks in 2005.

PowerBook G5 in summer, iBook G5 in time for the holiday season.

JSRockit

Sep 24, 2003, 06:25 AM

Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
PowerBook G5 in summer, iBook G5 in time for the holiday season.

No.

sparky76

Sep 24, 2003, 06:50 AM

Why the excitement about the ibook? The Powerbook is gorgeous, but the ibook is a slab of plastic. For far less than the price of an ibook I can get a Wintel laptop, to do all the same things and more.
Why not lower the entry price for the PB and kill the ibook line?

JSRockit

Sep 24, 2003, 06:56 AM

Originally posted by sparky76
Why the excitement about the ibook? The Powerbook is gorgeous, but the ibook is a slab of plastic. For far less than the price of an ibook I can get a Wintel laptop, to do all the same things and more.
Why not lower the entry price for the PB and kill the ibook line?

There is not one decent 12" PC laptop on the market.

sparky76

Sep 24, 2003, 02:05 PM

If anyone wants a 12" surely they can get a Powerbook - if they want a cheap laptop, get a PC.

JSRockit

Sep 24, 2003, 06:29 PM

Originally posted by sparky76
If anyone wants a 12" surely they can get a Powerbook - if they want a cheap laptop, get a PC.

Name a PC laptop at $999 with a real GPU?

deadpoet

Sep 27, 2003, 11:54 PM

Originally posted by tom.96
Has anyone else seen the report on macworld.co.uk that the new ibooks will have a G4 500 CPU and a 15" screen?

most ridiculous thing I've ever heard -- but then again I've only been a switcher for 5 months :)

The next iBook revision will most likely be a G3 speed bump to 1.0 Ghz and no more -- Apple don't want the iBook to eat into PB sales, obviously.

Oh and when I bought my 800Mhz iBook 5 months ago, it was by far the best value budget notebook on the market, especially if we're talking 12" LCD form factor. Even now, the iBook remains competitive, but I'd rather get a new 12" PB if I was to switch now since the prices have dropped dramatically.

I see the new cheap Wintel lappies out now, but I have absolutely no envy even when comparing my 5-month old iBook to them.

appleguy

Sep 30, 2003, 07:32 PM

Just had my weekly meeting with a mate from Apple (i work in the wonderful reseller land) and have a good relationship with the guys there. I was informed that in about 2 weeks there will be a major vamp across the line for iBooks something that we have never seen before. yeah I know that there are alot of posts on here saying that they have a mate of Steve or know people at Apple, so believe me or not.. its up to you. But my guess is that it won't be two weeks it will most likely be a little more around the 24th Oct so keep your eyes peeled.
They should have the new IBM G3 processor with speeds that will give your desk skid marks.

bennetsaysargh

Sep 30, 2003, 08:58 PM

this is good!
same night as the rumored everything else:p

i seriously hope it's true. it seems that the last generation of most hardware is mostly just a peed bump, so the last iBook updates were just a speed bump. so were the last CRT iMacs.

tutubibi

Oct 1, 2003, 11:51 AM

Another indication that iBook updates maybe near.
Futureshop.ca (big Canadian retailer, now part of BestBuy) just dropped iBook 14" prices by 150 CAD (~110 USD). Yesterday price was 2149 (same as apple.ca web store). Today price is 1999 CAD.
Funny that 12" models are still listed at 1449 and 1899 CAD.

Edit: Added link

http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/subclass.asp?catid=12450&mfr=&search=&logon=&langid=EN&dept=1&WLBS=fsweb10&sort=3&list=&page=0

Lancetx

Oct 1, 2003, 12:15 PM

Originally posted by tutubibi
Another indication that iBook updates maybe near.
Futureshop.ca (big Canadian retailer, now part of BestBuy) just dropped iBook 14" prices by 150 CAD (~110 USD). Yesterday price was 2149 (same as apple.ca web store). Today price is 1999 CAD.
Funny that 12" models are still listed at 1449 and 1899 CAD.

Edit: Added link

http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/subclass.asp?catid=12450&mfr=&search=&logon=&langid=EN&dept=1&WLBS=fsweb10&sort=3&list=&page=0

Looks like it's dropped now to $1849 CAD for the 12" combo drive model. I wish Apple would drop the prices for the entire line overall everywhere.

tutubibi

Oct 1, 2003, 12:25 PM

Originally posted by Lancetx
Looks like it's dropped now to $1849 CAD for the 12" combo drive model. I wish Apple would drop the prices for the entire line overall everywhere.

Sorry, probably my typo. I think it was $1849 CAD even at the time of my post. That's price at Apple online store in Canada as well.
However, Apple lists 12" CD-ROM model for $1429 CAD while futureshop.ca is at $1449 CAD.

wizard

Oct 1, 2003, 01:31 PM

Hi All;

Battery life and usability are reasonable areas for Apple to target. As far as marketing this should be the iBooks forte, that is they should offer leading edge power usage pefromance. This can not be achieved with by adding extra capacity to the chip as you point out.

At this point though I believe that the best course of action for increasing the peformance of a iBook is an on board memory controller in the PPC chip. Sure the more general processor improvements that you mentioned will help, but bandwidth is bandwith it is very hard to get around that. As far as your opjection to Alt-Vec on the grounds that it corrupts RISC concepts - that is nothing but rubish. Vector processing engines exist for specific reasons to solve specific classes of problems, just as RISC solves specific issues. The two are not incompatablle, but you do incure a significant power dissapation problem with the additional execution unit. The trick with such a unit on the G3 series of processors would be to implement it in such a way so that it does not use power when not needed.

As far as your understanding of a developers responsibility, I would say you are a bit off base here. It is the developers responsibility to pick and choice the data structures and code organization that leads to good performance. A good compiler can help with optimizing the code but that should not be consdered the same things as optimizing an application. Good application design will be the programmers / architects responsibility for some time.

Dual processors in a portable would be fantastic, unfortunately the people that need dualies the most are also are the people that benefit from Alt-Vec the most. So I suspect that you will see this first from Apple in a G4 based machine. On the other hand I think that IBM may be able to produce a dualie g3 chip real soon now. When that happens duali ibooks would be very interesting.

Thanks
Dave

Originally posted by Pedro Estarque
OK, so I'm getting tired of altivec. I've used it and it sure does speed up some things ( in my experience Photoshop and OSX GUI are much faster), but at what price?
First of all, I think it goes against the whole RISC chip design's philosophy. It adds complexity to the chip, increasing heat, making it harder to produce and therefore more expensive. If that developing effort was spent in better FPU, Integer, FSB, handling more instructions at a time, etc we could have a much better and cheaper PPC on our macs today.
Besides, you have to teach your developers to code their softwares in a specific way in order to get the speed boost, another example of mislead effort. A developer should focus on the features and productivity of their software, optimization is the compliler's job.
We all know how cool and energy efficient this G3s are. Imagine a dual G3 1.1 Ghz powerbook with 200 MHz FSB, 1MB L2cache per chip and 4.5 hours of battery life. It would toast any G4 in most tasks (except altivec instructions on non MP aware programs ) and probably most x86 laptops as well.

wizard

Oct 1, 2003, 01:57 PM

People seem to forget that Apple has a few smart people running the firm. One thing that is obvious is that the current implementation of the PowerBook will not be around for long, it is a non issue to be concenred about the performance of the G3 in an iBook. The iBook, with its current feature set, simply does not encroach at all into the PowerBook market.

As long as Apple carefuly manages the feature set of the iBook it does not have to worry about the unit having an impact on their other products. Even it it did so what! Lets face it Apple had been doing very well with their older machines, so apparently have been going in the right direction for some time now. As long as the iBook meets the needs of a certain segment of users all is well, the absolute processor performance is not an issue. Those individuals that need PowerBook specific features will always buy them not matter how fast the G3 iBooks are.

Dave

Originally posted by jouster
I would go a little further: the challenge would be getting Apple to use the resulting chip, which would, of course, be better and/or faster then the G4. It would be a little embarrassing to have the consumer portable line suddenly leapfrog the pro line.

Perhaps it is as simple as waiting for the G5 PowerBooks to be released. That way Apple retains the pro/consumer disparity.

wizard

Oct 1, 2003, 02:09 PM

I couldn't agree with you more the 14 inch machie solves problems for a certian set of customers. Everyone should be glad that Apple is willing to respond to customer needs.

As for the delusional individuals that beleive that you are getting noting for the little extra money Apple is charging, I have to say you need a reality check. Heck look at television which for more than a quarter century was available in one resolution irregardless of screen size. You never saw anybody complaining about paying a little extra for a larger screen. So whats the problem with a iBook? The 14 inch is a great machine the screen is the last thing that needs improvement on this iBook.

Thanks
Dave

Originally posted by Hmm
Maybe people don't remember when the 12" iBook was introduced. Everybody loved it, but a big complaint about it was the difficulty reading the screen. Even the magazine reviews referenced it. Yes, they said, you could scale the resolution back to 800x600, but it looked lousy since it wasn't the native resolution.

The 14" model wasn't some crazy ripoff scheme dreamed up by Apple. It was designed to appeal to the exact market that was complaining about the screen readibility when the 12" model came out. I'm no marketing major, but it sounds to me like when you've got a customer base wanting a particular product, then it makes sense to try to build it if you think you'll make money off it. It looks like that's what Apple did, and many people like me who bought the 14" model are very happy they did it.

Keep in mind that portability is only one aspect of a laptop. Mine lives in the house all the time and only occasionally travels from room to room. I mostly use it on the couch. The extra lb of weight isn't that big a deal to me, but I'm looking at that screen all the time, so the size and readability are of more importance to me. If I was a college student lugging the thing around all the time, I'd definitely go with the smaller model.

Either way, even the 14" model is still lighter than my indigo clamshell, with better resolution and a bigger screen. :)

tutubibi

Oct 1, 2003, 05:40 PM

First 14" iBook drops in price from $2149 CAD to $1999 CAD on futureshop.ca. That was this morning.
Now they attach "Clearance" tag to it. That ussualy happens for soon to be discontinued/updated products.

http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/class.asp?logon=&langid=EN&dept=1&WLBS=fsweb5&catid=3424

On the other hand. maybe futureshop.ca will not sell them any more?

bennetsaysargh

Oct 1, 2003, 06:22 PM

i smell an update!:D

murak

Oct 1, 2003, 07:03 PM

hmm.. I can see something on the horizon.. It´s... it´s white.. and man it´s bright! I better go fetch my sunglases...

tutubibi

Oct 2, 2003, 10:21 AM

iBook 14" Futureshop Update:

This morning price went up to $2099 CAD from $1999 yesterday. It's still down by $50 compared to 2 days ago.
And "Clearance" tag is removed.
Either futureshop reads macrumors or it was screw up. :confused:

macjay

Oct 3, 2003, 05:05 PM

markjones05

Oct 3, 2003, 05:34 PM

My girlfriend just got a 15 inch 2 ghz dell inspiron with 256 ram. Its three days old and we are returning it for an ibook 900 mhz 12 inch with 256 and cd burner and dvd rom. Her account will not be credited for at least a month so she wont be able to buy it untill then. My first question is, will the ibooks most likey be updated by then? And second, if they are updated will she be able to get the older version for a discounted price from the apple store? Or is it anyones opinion that we should buy the bew model? She isnt looking to spend anymore than 1,400. Please let me know what you guys think. Thanks

Markjones05

macphoria

Oct 3, 2003, 09:27 PM

What would you rather have?

iBook with 1 GHz G3

or

iBook with 867 MHz G4

markjones05

Oct 4, 2003, 09:06 AM

Originally posted by macphoria
What would you rather have?

iBook with 1 GHz G3

or

iBook with 867 MHz G4

We would either be getting the 900 mhz G3 now or a G4 when they come out. Wil the G4 be more or less expensive? What is worth it?

chacha75

Oct 4, 2003, 09:38 AM

I have the Winter 2001 600 Mhz iBook and have been waiting to upgrade. I went to compare prices and take a closer look at the new 15" and current 12" 887.

The design of the iBook has changed so much that it doesn't even attract me the way the 600 did when I bought it. I quite like the design of the 12" powerbook though and will not have any problems buying it when the new model is finally available. It is certainly more sturdy than the 15" TiBook. The store still had an older model on display and I checked to compare and that model felt like it was going to crumble in my hands (which is why I bought the iBook, as I recall). The new powerbooks do not have this flimsy feel about them and I feel confident that they will hold up just as we ll as my iBook has...

bennetsaysargh

Oct 4, 2003, 10:21 AM

whatever they do with the new iBooks, i hope it's something cool and original. i like the current ones, but the old ones too.
i really hope it's a different look to it, for the better.

hob

Oct 4, 2003, 08:10 PM

I'm on a pretty new 12.1" 900mhz G3 iBook right now, and i love it! It's not the best thing Apple have ever produced, but it does what i need it to - be small, v long battery life, and some good software!

The powerbook was barely a consideration when looking at Apple laptops, it's just ott for my needs!

IMHO, desktops should be powerful, and laptops should be ok! G5 Powerbook? I don't see the point, really - but i guess some people like their laptops powerfull!

hob *uber-noob!*

toughboy

Oct 4, 2003, 10:41 PM

Originally posted by usersince86
With the new PowerBook line, Apple needs to revise the iBook line very soon (or lower prices).

I too think iBooks are cool and a great laptop -- but right now, bang for the buck, it would be almost silly to buy an iBook (unless you don't need a CD-RW, I guess).

12.1" ibook/PowerBook Comparison (w/combo drive):

SAME (essentially)
================
12.1-inch TFT display
1024x768 resolution
512K L2 cache
40GB Ultra ATA/100 drive
Combo Drive (DVD-ROM/CD-RW)
10/100BASE-T Ethernet
Built-in 56K v.92 modem
FireWire 400

DIFFERENCES (iBook --- PowerBook)
==============================
900Mhz G3 --- 1Ghz G4
128MB SDRAM --- 256MB DDR266 SDRAM
ATI Mobility Radeon 7500 (32MB) --- NVIDIA GeForceFXGo 5200 (32MB)
USB 1.1 --- USB 2.0
AirPort ready --- AirPort extreme ready
(No BlueTooth) --- BlueTooth
VGA, S-Video and composite video --- Mini-DVI video out
$1299 --- $1599

DEFINITELY WORTH THE $300 DIFFERENCE (imho)

Again, the iBook has a market, but right now they need updated (or, again, prices need lowered).

thats why me, and many 12"PB users bought PowerBook but not iBook.. well, as an entry level user, I would buy an ibook if their price was a 1000 dolar (which means 600 dolar difference)..

well, just an opinion if apple wont mind: I think that white backlit shinin' under the PB keyboards would look lovely with the cute white case of iBook.. what do you think???