Motorola and Apple

[MacRumors]

Following Motorola's announcement (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2004/02/20040223113112.shtml) of the 1.5GHz PowerPC G4 processor, eWeek spoke with (http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,4149,1539135,00.asp) Greg Joswiak, Apple's vice president of hardware product marketing.

While unable to speak of future products, Joswiak was positive about Apple's relationship with Motorola indicated that he felt Apple use of Motorola processors would continue into the future.

The most appealing feature cited of the new Motorola Processor was its ability to provide reasonable performance while requiring relatively low power.

[trebblekicked]

the mention of "small designs" leads one to believe there's still future products in the pipeline that could use the g4. if moto can deliver even semi-annual power improvements, i suppose it's fine for the ibook/emac lineup for another year or so.

[Stolid]

Motorolas in the eMac, maybe even the iMac I have no problem with. But if you ask me Motorola's place is really going to become more restricted. I'd put bets on 'handheld' projects and whatnot; but they've proven they won't update their line very often which leads me to severe worries if new PowerBooks are Motorola G4s. I'd love a PB G5 but its more because I *DON'T* want a G4 :P

[virividox]

bring back the cube :D hehehe

i can dream cant i

[Tiauguinho]

The most appealing feature cited of the new Motorola Processor was its ability to provide reasonable performance while requiring relatively low power.

Reasonable performance... It's quite sad that they admit this. I'm anxious for the new Powerbooks since i want to get a new one, my PB G4 550 is already lagging behind, but after using a G5 (I have a Dual G5 2Ghz) I won't buy another G4 at all!

[spinko]

Reasonable performance... It's quite sad that they admit this. I'm anxious for the new Powerbooks since i want to get a new one, my PB G4 550 is already lagging behind, but after using a G5 (I have a Dual G5 2Ghz) I won't buy another G4 at all!

Right !! Right !! Right !!

I bought a new AlBook G4 1Ghz/768 MbRAM thinking it could replace a lesser Mhz desktop machine. I sold it 2 weeks later because it only seemed slighly faster than a 466Mhz G4 Desktop Computer (which has more L3 cache but costs a fraction second hand)... Before that I had a Ti550, which was only barely faster than it's predecessor the Ti500 also costing far less secon hand, there again probably because of the missing L3 cache. This time, I'm going to wait until Apple overhawls the architecture in the PB line and adds a G5 chip.

[eSnow]

The most appealing feature cited of the new Motorola Processor was its ability to provide reasonable performance while requiring relatively low power.

He got it all wrong: the G4 is able to provide relatively low performance while requiring reasonable power.
:p

Oh, and Joswiak: I have seen the current Powerbooks, and no, that is not sufficient. I ain't going to buy one of those unless Apple provides:
- better screens. Brighter and with a better resolution.
- better battery runtimes.
- faster CPUs.

Since my IIsi (back from '91 - '96), I have never owned any Mac as long as my current Ti/400. Seems I will have to wait still longer...

[aswitcher]

Following Motorola's announcement (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2004/02/20040223113112.shtml) of the 1.5GHz PowerPC G4 processor, eWeek spoke with (http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,4149,1539135,00.asp) Greg Joswiak, Apple's vice president of hardware product marketing.

While unable to speak of future products, Joswiak was positive about Apple's relationship with Motorola indicated that he felt Apple use of Motorola processors would continue into the future.

The most appealing feature cited of the new Motorola Processor was its ability to provide reasonable performance while requiring relatively low power.

Well lets hope Apple have set their mind that G4s go in "i" line and G5s go in the "power" line. I don't want to buy a bandaid machine in the form of a new rev G4 PowerBook.

[lind0834]

I wanna see those 1.5 G4s in the iBooks. :) G5s in the PB, and boost the iBook to top of the line G4s.. Dream Dream Dream.

[Analog Kid]

Reasonable performance... It's quite sad that they admit this. I'm anxious for the new Powerbooks since i want to get a new one, my PB G4 550 is already lagging behind, but after using a G5 (I have a Dual G5 2Ghz) I won't buy another G4 at all!

The actual quote is "good performance", if you read the article.

The G4 isn't a bad chip, and Apple has used it well. I think a lot of the resentment to it stems from it's problems as a desktop CPU, where it was clearly outclassed. Every time I'm in a meeting and the Intel folks have to carry in a wall brick and find a way of snaking to a power outlet, I'm reminded of how good the G4 really is....

A meeting has to run over 6 hours before I have to switch batteries.

[CmdrLaForge]

bring back the cube :D hehehe

i can dream cant i

But hopefully not with a G4 !!!! C'mon Apple - bring on the G5 cube with 2GHz

[spinko]

The actual quote is "good performance", if you read the article.

The G4 isn't a bad chip, and Apple has used it well. I think a lot of the resentment to it stems from it's problems as a desktop CPU, where it was clearly outclassed. Every time I'm in a meeting and the Intel folks have to carry in a wall brick and find a way of snaking to a power outlet, I'm reminded of how good the G4 really is....

A meeting has to run over 6 hours before I have to switch batteries.

I'm not sure the Desktop G4 implementation is to blame. I'm using a Dual G4 1.25 Mhz DT computer at work and it does fine. I think the lack of cache has given it the reputation of beeing slow, i.e. not snappy for all the repetitive tasks - especially in the Finder. "Snappyness" is very important, psychologically and removing the L3 cache doesn't help making the computer "feel" faster.

By the way, I'm sure they could get much more battery time if they clocked the G4 at 100 Mhz but you certainly wouldn't get much work done ;-)

[iHack]

What's with all the negativity? The G4 has served Apple (and us) well and only just has made it to the ibook. A change to a 1,5 MHz G4 in the ibook would be great. That's quite an improvement and beats desktops Apple was just selling a year ago. In an ibook! Way cool, i'd say...

[CrackedButter]

The most appealing feature cited of the new Motorola Processor was its ability to provide reasonable performance while requiring relatively low power.

Its so advanced it doesn't have to use DDR memory.

I sold my PB after realising it isn't worth the asking price. I got an eMac instead which is only 250mhz slower and £1000 cheaper! Much better performance price ratio.

[Frisco]

I fear this can only delay the time the G5 makes it into other Apple computers, specially the Powerbook :mad:

[Photorun]

What's with all the negativity? The G4 has served Apple (and us) well and only just has made it to the ibook. A change to a 1,5 MHz G4 in the ibook would be great. That's quite an improvement and beats desktops Apple was just selling a year ago. In an ibook! Way cool, i'd say...

The negativity stems from Moto NOT delivering chips as promised and completely, and I do mean completely, dropping the ball on keeping their chips competitive in the marketplace. Other than fact they are mostly to blame for Apple's performance woes (only perhaps behind Apple sticking with them but they were under contract) I guess Moto is okay. Personally I saw no Moto anywhere as soon as the G5 can be shoe horned into everything, including an eMac. So long Moto, you were the albatross around Apple's neck, good riddance.

PS I saw a white paper on G4's road map (74xx/75xx) a while back and didn't even think the chip had any legs, topping out at maybe, MAYBE, upper 1.x GHz... so what the hell new chip is Moto developing to keep going faster and competitive. Oh right, Moto as a company is about to implode, they don't HAVE a new chip in development. :p

[iLilana]

Reasonable performance... It's quite sad that they admit this. I'm anxious for the new Powerbooks since i want to get a new one, my PB G4 550 is already lagging behind, but after using a G5 (I have a Dual G5 2Ghz) I won't buy another G4 at all!

g4 1.5ghz iBook

g4 isn't cutting it for PB market anymore.

[ITR 81]

I fear this can only delay the time the G5 makes it into other Apple computers, specially the Powerbook :mad:

Nah the G5 will be delayed because of cooling issues..not because of some new G4 processor.

Remember the dual 1.42Ghz G4 PM?? If not it's because it was replaced by the G5 in less then 3 months...it was a stop gap processor.

[allpar]

If you think the G4 is far too slow...are you using 10.3? Earlier versions of OS X had real lag issues. 10.3 seems far "snappier" using the same hardware.

[ionas]

...
- better screens. Brighter and with a better resolution.
- better battery runtimes.
- faster CPUs...

1. screens, 2. battery, 3. cpu

1. you are completely right, those damn small displays regarding resolution,
and mac os x is very pixel hungry. i hope they build in

Model 1 - 12" - SXGA (1280*960), 1,2288 Megapixels
Model 2 - 15" - SXGA+ (1400*1050), 1,47 Megapixels
Model 3 - 15" - WXGA+ (1440*900), 1,296 Megapixels
Model 4 - 17" - WSXGA+ (1680*1050), 1,764 Megapixels
Model 5 - 17" - UXGA (1600*1200), 1,92 Megapixels

all those display pixel sizes are normal displays from the pc market, and dont claim that display from the pc market are crap, there are some, but if i take a look at the ibook - well thats a really bad contrast display as well.

further important points:

- Weight
- Battery Runtime!!!
- Size
- No-Fan-System while doing Internet/Office
- even harder to scratch and break case, maybe some water protection (if
you upend juice onto your notebook's keyboard)
- Backlit-lightsensitive-Keyboard
- Digital Mousebuttons that dont break and are programmable
(per default there is only one mouse button, but you can program it to have
to mice button next to each other)
- Black Onyx Display (2. you are completely right)
- 2-3x USB 2x
- FW 400/800
- SPDIF Out/In
- SVGA Out, DVI Out
- Docking Port
- DVD Burner

Regarding a CPU the 1,5 GHZ G4 fits perfectly into all but of the models,
the G5 might not even be faster if you consider that the bus speed would be only 1/2 or even 1/4 the one of the desktop G5, and that you only got one cpu, and all those things. You cant put a G5 Desktop System into a PB it seems, else apple would have already done that.

the G4. 1.5 GHz is a thing to welcome and not to flame on.
even the wintel front - at least the technicans, see that mhzs isnt important but wireless, low weight, well scaling systems are what ppl really need.

the g5 might be a nice cpu for these things, but the g4 1.5 might as well fit 100%tly cause in a notebook it isnt about pure power.

those who dont get that are either totally stupid :p, want some super small and light thin client notebook with wireless gigabit connection to a raw power server.

(imagen sub 1 kilo, 1cm high with keyboard and display, - all the system has to do is to put the video stream onto the display, send input control commands to the server)

[pbrennen]

Nah the G5 will be delayed because of cooling issues..not because of some new G4 processor.

Remember the dual 1.42Ghz G4 PM?? If not it's because it was replaced by the G5 in less then 3 months...it was a stop gap processor.i asked this question in the thread about cooligy and apple... what is the problem with cooling and the g5? i was under the impression that a g5 pulls less watts than a g4 at equivalent clock.

[blackfox]

I know people in these forums have no love for motorola, but I still think the G4 is a good chip, perhaps long in the tooth, but a solid performer. I feel that if the system-bus /memory issues were addressed this G4 would perform quite nicely...that always seemed the problem anyway w/ limiting performance...moto was supposedly tooling around w/ something to this effect...may never see it obviously...but if this chip (or a future iteration) runs cool enough and is implemented thoughtfully, it could have a respectable place in Apple hardwre in the near-future...of course, I'd be in line to buy a PB G5 like the next guy...but done right, I might be for future G4 products too...just thinking...

[wrldwzrd89]

I know people in these forums have no love for motorola, but I still think the G4 is a good chip, perhaps long in the tooth, but a solid performer. I feel that if the system-bus /memory issues were addressed this G4 would perform quite nicely...that always seemed the problem anyway w/ limiting performance...moto was supposedly tooling around w/ something to this effect...may never see it obviously...but if this chip (or a future iteration) runs cool enough and is implemented thoughtfully, it could have a respectable place in Apple hardwre in the near-future...of course, I'd be in line to buy a PB G5 like the next guy...but done right, I might be for future G4 products too...just thinking...

Motorola certainly has a bad reputation for delaying their chip releases and having horrible yields on their production process, but that doesn't stop them from releasing chips for Apple. I have a 1.25 GHz G4 17" iMac that I'm very happy with. Now I don't have any real gamers' games, but the one game I do have that will tax the graphics card (realMYST) runs just fine on my iMac, even at max resolution and quality. I bought the iMac in early February because I was tired of waiting for PowerMac G5 upgrades and I figured it would be fast enough for what it's used for. I find the G4 processor in there to be 'snappy' enough. I won't get a G5/G6/G7 until 2007 at the earliest. I know my iMac G4 will be outdated by then, but I don't really care.

[gekko513]

I don't believe the cooling issue is the problem with G5s in PBs. I just think it's a question of availability of G5 processors and chipsets. To put G5s in the PB they need redesigned motherboards for the whole PB line (including controllers for RAM and I/O). This is a huge engineering task. It takes time to design this and to test it properly.

They will probably also redo or at least rethink the overall design. We should be grateful that Apple takes the time to develop a quality product rather than put out something in a hurry. I know that Apple (as all other manufacturers) sometimes still gets things wrong with new products, but it could've been much worse. Apple did after all score highest on customer satisfaction-something in the stats from consumer reports recently.

The new G4 processor will not lead to a delay in G5 product development, it will just give us consumers a better product line overall.

[gekko513]

The G4 just needs a 533 MHz front side bus. If they could manage that, I think it could still be used successfully in the iBook, eMac line for some years.

[spinko]

sorry, post further down

[TWinbrook46636]

For all those expecting a 1.5 GHz G4 in the next iBook... Dont. Remember that this is already pushing the limits of the Motorola G4. The iBook will one day get this but Apple needs a series of upgrades for the iBook over the next year or so as the PowerBook transitions over to the G5. We will probably see approximate speed upgrades of 1.25 GHz in the iBook first, then 1.33 GHz, maybe 1.42 GHz and finally 1.5 GHz. If Apple gave the next iBook the 1.5 GHz first they would have no upgrade path left after that other than to move the iBook over to the G5 as well. By starting the next iBook at 1.25 GHz it leaves them breathing room.

[spinko]

I don't believe the cooling issue is the problem with G5s in PBs. I just think it's a question of availability of G5 processors and chipsets. To put G5s in the PB they need redesigned motherboards for the whole PB line (including controllers for RAM and I/O). This is a huge engineering task. It takes time to design this and to test it properly.

They will probably also redo or at least rethink the overall design. We should be grateful that Apple takes the time to develop a quality product rather than put out something in a hurry. I know that Apple (as all other manufacturers) sometimes still gets things wrong with new products, but it could've been much worse. Apple did after all score highest on customer satisfaction-something in the stats from consumer reports recently.

I'm sure its a huge task but they have had prototypes of the G5's for quite a while now. Couldn't Apple just take the basic design of the G5 DT including controllers, etc. and scale it to fit a Powerbook format ? Personally, I don't care if they bring out a 1ghz version with a IBM G5 proc. as long as they update the architecture to the latest standard instead of updating an outdated design that seemingly hasn't evolved much since the good old Pismo with a G4

[wizard]

This is exactly the attitude that keeps many of us away from Apple hardware. It is also the attitude that allows Apple to market 3 year old technologoy to the consumer market without any embarassment at all.

If motorola has a processor that runs at 1.5GHz then it needs to be introduced in a product, such a processor does no good sitting on a shelf. Besides who in theri right mind would go out an buy a iBook knowing that a processor sits on the shelf that would allow their machine to run 25% faster, but isn't in their machine due to some half baked marketing scheme.

It might not be a problem if the G4 @ 1.2 GHZ could offer world class performance or even match the bottom of the line of Pentium M processors but it can't even do that. apple really needs to commit to offering at least comperable performance to the i86 world. Offering compromises has not gotten them anywhere recently. Apple is to deeply into catch up mode to be delivering anything less than a fully competitive machine.

Thanks
Dave

For all those expecting a 1.5 GHz G4 in the next iBook... Dont. Remember that this is already pushing the limits of the Motorola G4. The iBook will one day get this but Apple needs a series of upgrades for the iBook over the next year or so as the PowerBook transitions over to the G5. We will probably see approximate speed upgrades of 1.25 GHz in the iBook first, then 1.33 GHz, maybe 1.42 GHz and finally 1.5 GHz. If Apple gave the next iBook the 1.5 GHz first they would have no upgrade path left after that other than to move the iBook over to the G5 as well. By starting the next iBook at 1.25 GHz it leaves them breathing room.

[Grimace]

If apple wants to strongly differentiate between consumer and pro models, use Moto G4s in the emac/imac/ibook lines and G5s in the powerbook/powermac - with only dual processors in the powermacs. That sends a strong message.

[wizard]

The short answer is no.

The long answer could become very involved but mostly revolves around power usage. The current Northbridge uses alot of power.

So power reduction would most likely be high on the list of corrective actions. Along with that would be the elimination of all multiprocessing features. Even after that you would still have a processor / northbridge combo that is rather power hungery. Wether this would be a saleable machine is entirely up to the customer base, I would suspect that most of Apples customer base is expecting to be able to run their machines on batteries.

To be perfectly honest at this point I would thik that Apple would be better off paying Motorola to produce a G4 with a built in memory interface. Or to use one of Motorolas integrated chips, especially for the iBook line.

I just don't see the G5 cutting the mustard so to speak with the 90nm chip. It is not clear at this point just how efficient the 970FX is when running the loads that Mac users run. Apple might have a chance if they can move the entire chip set to 90nm and add a great deal of power savings features. The problem is that you are likely to end up with a much slower 970 implementation at whcih point a G4 would be faster.

Dave

I'm sure its a huge task but they have had prototypes of the G5's for quite a while now. Couldn't Apple just take the basic design of the G5 DT including controllers, etc. and scale it to fit a Powerbook format ? Personally, I don't care if they bring out a 1ghz version with a IBM G5 proc. as long as they update the architecture to the latest standard instead of updating an outdated design that seemingly hasn't evolved much since the good old Pismo with a G4

[a17inchFuture]

I don't believe the cooling issue is the problem with G5s in PBs. I just think it's a question of availability of G5 processors and chipsets. To put G5s in the PB they need redesigned motherboards for the whole PB line (including controllers for RAM and I/O). This is a huge engineering task. It takes time to design this and to test it properly.

They will probably also redo or at least rethink the overall design. We should be grateful that Apple takes the time to develop a quality product rather than put out something in a hurry. I know that Apple (as all other manufacturers) sometimes still gets things wrong with new products, but it could've been much worse. Apple did after all score highest on customer satisfaction-something in the stats from consumer reports recently.

The new G4 processor will not lead to a delay in G5 product development, it will just give us consumers a better product line overall.


Do you honestly think that Apple hasn't been working on G5 PB designs since BEFORE the G5 tower came out? Well they have. And that means that there will be no delay. If the next iteration of pb's has a g4, it will be a bomb for apple. Everyone knows about the 970FX chip, and even more know about the impending g5 books in the NEAR future. Therefore, if moto's g4's are in the next rev of pb's, people aren't gonna buy it, they are gonna wait for the g5, as they know its coming.

But more to the point: It has been longer than the average period of time since they updated (163 days), and usually, that number is the average because of the fact that they update every 8 months, then 4 or 5 months later. The last TWO updates have come well beyond the 163 day marker, and since both updates "boasted" mediocre bumps, and since the 1.5 G4 is only a 13 % increase, don't expect them to be in the next pb's.

And if they are, Apple, don't expect any sales, cause I'm not buyin' it, and I am SERIOUSLY in the market for a new powerbook.

[a17inchFuture]

The short answer is no.

The long answer could become very involved but mostly revolves around power usage. The current Northbridge uses alot of power.

So power reduction would most likely be high on the list of corrective actions. Along with that would be the elimination of all multiprocessing features. Even after that you would still have a processor / northbridge combo that is rather power hungery. Wether this would be a saleable machine is entirely up to the customer base, I would suspect that most of Apples customer base is expecting to be able to run their machines on batteries.

To be perfectly honest at this point I would thik that Apple would be better off paying Motorola to produce a G4 with a built in memory interface. Or to use one of Motorolas integrated chips, especially for the iBook line.

I just don't see the G5 cutting the mustard so to speak with the 90nm chip. It is not clear at this point just how efficient the 970FX is when running the loads that Mac users run. Apple might have a chance if they can move the entire chip set to 90nm and add a great deal of power savings features. The problem is that you are likely to end up with a much slower 970 implementation at whcih point a G4 would be faster.

Dave

You act as if you knwo what you are talking about, yet you also act as if Apple was surprised by teh unveiling of the 970FX?

So which is it? do you know what your talking about, or do you think they were surprised by its unveiling? Cause it certainly isn't both.

And p.s., no one here knows if it will cut the mustard, so way to be on the ball on that one.

However, I am sure it does, or there wouldn't be any big deal being made about. Sorry, but I feel that thats a dumb comment. Of course it will cut the mustard, thus why ibm has already been quoted ( during its "unveiling") as saying it will be in Apple's comps.

[hayesk]

Right !! Right !! Right !!

I bought a new AlBook G4 1Ghz/768 MbRAM thinking it could replace a lesser Mhz desktop machine. I sold it 2 weeks later because it only seemed slighly faster than a 466Mhz G4 Desktop Computer (which has more L3 cache but costs a fraction second hand)... Before that I had a Ti550, which was only barely faster than it's predecessor the Ti500 also costing far less secon hand, there again probably because of the missing L3 cache. This time, I'm going to wait until Apple overhawls the architecture in the PB line and adds a G5 chip.

Funny, I bought the same one and it feels faster than my QuickSilver 733 - perhaps something was wrong with your Albook? (or you were doing something requiring huge amounts of RAM).

Anyway, I've read all the rumors and decided to buy one (just this weekend) because I want one to use now. A new one may be announced tomorrow but it will still take time to get in stock. Working on one now will pay for any price/spec difference. There's always something better coming out, there's no point in playing the waiting game if you need to use one now. If you truly need the maximum speed, you can sell your existing Mac and buy a new one when it is available.

[pgwalsh]

Well lets hope Apple have set their mind that G4s go in "i" line and G5s go in the "power" line. I don't want to buy a bandaid machine in the form of a new rev G4 PowerBook.Hopefully just the iBook and eMac. It would be sad to see a revised iMac with a G4. Actually it would be great to see the iBook get a new proc too.

[iggyb]

If apple wants to strongly differentiate between consumer and pro models, use Moto G4s in the emac/imac/ibook lines and G5s in the powerbook/powermac - with only dual processors in the powermacs. That sends a strong message.

Only if they further decrease the price in the G4 line. When an eMac costs more than a Dell system with a 17" LCD screen, then competing on the low end with price would be a bad idea.

[QCassidy352]

Nah the G5 will be delayed because of cooling issues..not because of some new G4 processor.

Remember the dual 1.42Ghz G4 PM?? If not it's because it was replaced by the G5 in less then 3 months...it was a stop gap processor.

the voice of reason. :)

If there's another generation of G4 powerbooks, it's not to make us angry; it's because they haven't been able to put the G5 in a powerbook yet. You think apple doesn't know that people want a G5 powerbook?

If we see new G4 powerbooks, what you need to realize is that the choice wasn't G4 vs. G5, it was the current line of G4s vs. updated G4s. If the G5 were ready for a PB, it would be in a PB, new G4 or no new G4.

[sedarby]

bring back the cube :D hehehe

i can dream cant i

The cube is history. Get over it already.

[a17inchFuture]

the voice of reason. :)

If there's another generation of G4 powerbooks, it's not to make us angry; it's because they haven't been able to put the G5 in a powerbook yet. You think apple doesn't know that people want a G5 powerbook?

If we see new G4 powerbooks, what you need to realize is that the choice wasn't G4 vs. G5, it was the current line of G4s vs. updated G4s. If the G5 were ready for a PB, it would be in a PB, new G4 or no new G4.

I completely agree, but I think and hope they are there by now. As I've said before, its not like the ibm chip snuck up on them. They knew about it a long time ago, and they have been making preparations since. And as far as changing the controllers, etc., the g5 chip was the biggest issue, and I am sure that apple has been changing the controllers, etc. in expectaion of some sort of g5 chip that would be usuable in pb's long before Ibm delivered the 970fx.

Just my opinion, but if i am wrong, apple has some bad business sense (something I think we all highly doubt)

[jettredmont]

Oh, and Joswiak: I have seen the current Powerbooks, and no, that is not sufficient. I ain't going to buy one of those unless Apple provides:
- better screens. Brighter and with a better resolution.
- better battery runtimes.
- faster CPUs.


One of these things is not like the others
One of things does not belong
One of these things is not like the others
Can you tell which one?

[bcsmith]

I'm anxious for the new Powerbooks since i want to get a new one, my PB G4 550 is already lagging behind, but after using a G5 (I have a Dual G5 2Ghz) I won't buy another G4 at all!

Isn't is possible that the reason your PB G4 lags your PM G5 is the fact that you are comparing a 550 Mhz machine to a dual 2 Ghz machine. Not to say that a dual 2 Ghz G4 would compete, but I think that there is a lot more to your performance gap than a simple difference in chip architecture.

[idkew]

He got it all wrong: the G4 is able to provide relatively low performance while requiring reasonable power.
:p

Oh, and Joswiak: I have seen the current Powerbooks, and no, that is not sufficient. I ain't going to buy one of those unless Apple provides:
- better screens. Brighter and with a better resolution.
- better battery runtimes.
- faster CPUs.

Since my IIsi (back from '91 - '96), I have never owned any Mac as long as my current Ti/400. Seems I will have to wait still longer...

very good post. i agree 100%.

plus, i don't think i have ever owned an apple as long as my current 667 rev b powerbook ti, except maybe for my first computer, the apple IIe.

[mrsebastian]

of course moto ain't going anywhere, cause apple's uses the g4 all over the place. i think it's only a matter of time before the g5 moves in to complete the apple line. that said, it doesn't make me, nor most other pb/ibook fans happy that we're stuck with the g4 for now. i got a 1.33 ghz pb right now that does the job well enough, but it ain't a g5 :(

[spinko]

Funny, I bought the same one and it feels faster than my QuickSilver 733 - perhaps something was wrong with your Albook? (or you were doing something requiring huge amounts of RAM)..

Maybe it's your QuickSilver 733 thats not running as fast as it could ;) . I'm going to use an "old" 466 G4 DT until Apple brings out a PG G5....

[noel4r]

this is a step in the wrong direction, Apple needs to forget the G4, they've got the G5 now, they need to figure a way to get the G5 in there.

G4 - yesterday
G5 - tomorrow

[Sun Baked]

this is a step in the wrong direction, Apple needs to forget the G4, they've got the G5 now, they need to figure a way to get the G5 in there.

G4 - yesterday
G5 - tomorrowGet over it, the G4 isn't a bad chip -- it's the FSB buses extremely low GB/s bandwidth that sucks and is tanking it's performance.

Motorola has a solution, Rapid I/O, but they are only publicly announcing it for their "other" PowerPC offerings (along with saying on-board memory controller and RIO are the future of the PPC line).

Sucks for us...

The e-Book line and extremely low power PPC chips with RIO and on-board memory controller may be great for their market niche, but their fundamental lack of some instructions and core processing units make them useless for a PowerBook.

The utter and complete lack of news on the 7457-RM (G4+RIO+memory controller) after the Motorola G5 cancelation rumor makes one wonder, since it would have been a great complement for a computer company using the PPC970.

[macdong]

And if they are, Apple, don't expect any sales, cause I'm not buyin' it, and I am SERIOUSLY in the market for a new powerbook.

and i was called being bull sh*tting when i said only desperate people would buy a rev PowerBook G4. :(

[Flowbee]

I sold my PB after realising it isn't worth the asking price. I got an eMac instead which is only 250mhz slower and £1000 cheaper! Much better performance price ratio.

So what kind of bag are you using to carry that eMac around?

[SiliconAddict]

Yet the question of the week which others have commented on:
What is the fastest system bus these CPU's support. That is the major bottleneck, IMHO, at this point.

Honestly, at this point I don't give a rats *** about Motorola. They have screwed Apple so frequently giving minimal incremental speed bumps that considering Motorola as a option for future Apple products seems asinine.

[allpar]

Dare I point out that the G4 laptops are still largely competitive with their PC counterparts? Though that won't last.

[Snowy_River]

I sold my PB after realising it isn't worth the asking price. I got an eMac instead which is only 250mhz slower and £1000 cheaper! Much better performance price ratio.

You seem surprised that a top-end portable is more expensive than a bottom-end desktop? By that logic, I should be appalled by the fact I can get a DP 1.8GHz G5 PM for £100 less than the 1.25GHz G4 PB. Why should I have to pay more for less power!! :rolleyes:

[Snowy_River]

For all those expecting a 1.5 GHz G4 in the next iBook... Dont. Remember that this is already pushing the limits of the Motorola G4. The iBook will one day get this but Apple needs a series of upgrades for the iBook over the next year or so as the PowerBook transitions over to the G5. We will probably see approximate speed upgrades of 1.25 GHz in the iBook first, then 1.33 GHz, maybe 1.42 GHz and finally 1.5 GHz. If Apple gave the next iBook the 1.5 GHz first they would have no upgrade path left after that other than to move the iBook over to the G5 as well. By starting the next iBook at 1.25 GHz it leaves them breathing room.

I seriously question your logic. You are operating on the assumption that this is the last G4 update that will ever be. If that's the case, then Apple will want to move off of the G4 altogether. If that's not the case, then Apple will use this update in their consumer machines now, and use the further updates as they come along. Either way, they'll use these now. It would be a PR nightmare for them not to, as the chips have been publicly announced by Moto.

This is exactly the attitude that keeps many of us away from Apple hardware. It is also the attitude that allows Apple to market 3 year old technologoy to the consumer market without any embarassment at all.

...

Thanks
Dave

Dave,

I wouldn't take the comments of one cynical poster as gospel. Don't think that Apple has no smart marketing people employed there...

[stockscalper]

I seriously question your logic. You are operating on the assumption that this is the last G4 update that will ever be. If that's the case, then Apple will want to move off of the G4 altogether. If that's not the case, then Apple will use this update in their consumer machines now, and use the further updates as they come along. Either way, they'll use these now. It would be a PR nightmare for them not to, as the chips have been publicly announced by Moto.



I think it is a fair assumption that the 1.5 ghz chip is the end of the line for Moto. Why? Because they reached this speed 2 1/2 years ago in the core chip design. Any (minor) speed bumps they've had since then has been via over clock cycling. The G4 is so over clocked that it's pathetic. It runs much hotter and consumes way more power than it should at that speed, especially compared to the new 970 fx at 1.6 ghz. On the flip side, it can stay competitive with this chip at least for this run because even as much power as it uses it is still less than the P4.

[noel4r]

Get over it, the G4 isn't a bad chip -- it's the FSB buses extremely low GB/s bandwidth that sucks and is tanking it's performance.

Motorola has a solution, Rapid I/O, but they are only publicly announcing it for their "other" PowerPC offerings (along with saying on-board memory controller and RIO are the future of the PPC line).

Sucks for us...

The e-Book line and extremely low power PPC chips with RIO and on-board memory controller may be great for their market niche, but their fundamental lack of some instructions and core processing units make them useless for a PowerBook.

The utter and complete lack of news on the 7457-RM (G4+RIO+memory controller) after the Motorola G5 cancelation rumor makes one wonder, since it would have been a great complement for a computer company using the PPC970.

I didn't say the G4 was a bad chip, I'm saying it's an old chip now that we have the G5 chip. While I'm at it, the G3 was a good chip too, but an old one.

[jettredmont]

Nah the G5 will be delayed because of cooling issues..not because of some new G4 processor.

Remember the dual 1.42Ghz G4 PM?? If not it's because it was replaced by the G5 in less then 3 months...it was a stop gap processor.

Well, actually, the dual 1.42GHz box was replaced by a dual 1.25GHz box and the *promise* of the G5 in three months. Those of us who bought the dual 1.42GHz machines when they came out (which is, to be quite honest, quite a damned nice machine!) got a good six+ months of use out of them before they were obsoleted on paper ... and a good three months where you couldn't *get* a faster Mac!

For those who care about such things ... :)

[Snowy_River]

I think it is a fair assumption that the 1.5 ghz chip is the end of the line for Moto. Why? Because they reached this speed 2 1/2 years ago in the core chip design. Any (minor) speed bumps they've had since then has been via over clock cycling. The G4 is so over clocked that it's pathetic. It runs much hotter and consumes way more power than it should at that speed, especially compared to the new 970 fx at 1.6 ghz. On the flip side, it can stay competitive with this chip at least for this run because even as much power as it uses it is still less than the P4.

In which case, once the iBook is ready to go to another upgrade beyond this one, in, say, a year from now, it should move to something else. What? Well, I'd say either a low-end G5, or, if it actually exists, the oft-rumored 750VX, G3+Altivec, IBM version of the G4. Please note, I'm not commenting on the existence or non-existence of the 750VX, simply making an 'if it does exist' statement about the future of the iBook.

[MacFan25]

As much as I would like to see Apple stray away from the G4, as long as the speeds are improved and heat issues are taken care of, then I think its a fine chip to use in consumer level products.

I just hope they put the G5 in a Powerbook soon...

[SiliconAddict]

Dare I point out that the G4 laptops are still largely competitive with their PC counterparts? Though that won't last.

Umm no it isn't.

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

The Pentium M buries the G4. 1.6Ghz Pentium M is aprox twice as fast as a 1.33 G4 It's possible with an overhaul with the G4's supported system bus it could clean up some of the speed gaps but as it stands a clock upgrade isn't going to fix the underlying problem.

[blackfox]

does all this rampant speculation make people expect too much?
I would be happy with an update of current G4 models with a more modern architecture and a modest speed bump(s). The PM could just as easily be left alone for a while, save fixing rev a quirks. Apple finally has PM to be proud of, if motorola (or IBM) can do the same for the rest of the line, power to them. A low-powered G4 with a revamped bus would work for me. As much as I would like apple to have the fastest computers, for the vast majority of people, they just need to be fast enough. For better or worse, raw speed has never been an Apple selling point. Give us a revamped bus/memory controller on all models, a quick processor and a long battery-life (i/eMac excluded)...the apple experience will take care f the rest...sorry for rambling on...

[MrMacMan]

One of these things is not like the others
One of things does not belong
One of these things is not like the others
Can you tell which one?

No, we can't.

ionas -- That was quite a list... maybe someone nees to add COST...

If you want a billion features, ask apple to make a custom model... but not for everyone...

The G4 is a slap in the face, I don't know I don't like the speed of my computer ... I don't know.

[pgwalsh]

does all this rampant speculation make people expect too much?
I would be happy with an update of current G4 models with a more modern architecture and a modest speed bump(s). The PM could just as easily be left alone for a while, save fixing rev a quirks. Apple finally has PM to be proud of, if motorola (or IBM) can do the same for the rest of the line, power to them. A low-powered G4 with a revamped bus would work for me. As much as I would like apple to have the fastest computers, for the vast majority of people, they just need to be fast enough. For better or worse, raw speed has never been an Apple selling point. Give us a revamped bus/memory controller on all models, a quick processor and a long battery-life (i/eMac excluded)...the apple experience will take care f the rest...sorry for rambling on...Well, I think many people including myself are looking for better value for your $$$. It seems the PC hardware has better value than Apples hardware. Though most of the computer is the same, the speed seems to be the main difference. When you're going to spend a couple thousand dollars or more, you want to get the most for your money. The classic Mac fan will always tell you it's about the OS. But we're all well aware that gap is closing or has closed. Of course you can argure the finer points, but in the end I think some of us would like to get the best possible for our dollar. Apples' current portables do seem to fall a bit short for the price.

[Naimfan]

PGWalsh--

I don't mean to sound like an Apple apologist, but I've recently flirted with going to a wintel laptop and just couldn't do it. Quite aside from their being hideous (which I freely grant is a highly personal and subjective opinion), it just doesn't seem to me like they can do everything the Mac does as easily from a user perspective. I'd also grant that I'm far from a power user, but even so, I'm using a laptop that's now something like 4 years old (a Pismo) and nothing has gone wrong with it, no data has been lost, etc.

I have a lot of friends who have wintel laptops and I daily hear stories of how something or other can't be done, crashed, etc. One of the funnier things I've seen was the display of a Dell Inspiron literally coming off in the person's hand as they tried to open it up.... I've seen that happen in class three times now... One of my best friends has a one year Toshiba something or other laptop; he has lost data due to crashes, has had to erase and install Windows (XP, I think....) numerous times, etc. And I fully understand how anecdotal all the above is.

My essential point is that I respectfully disagree with your feeling that the Mac laptops are not a good value. Certainly from a hardware number perspective (EG, CPU speed, etc.) they don't appear to be, but as has been pointed out here ad infinitum there is far more to life than numbers. (And I'd be pretty confident you know that or you wouldn't be here.)

Best,

Bob

[Opteron]

It wont last. a FSB of 167MHz is just way to slack.

[aswitcher]

I think it is a fair assumption that the 1.5 ghz chip is the end of the line for Moto. Why? Because they reached this speed 2 1/2 years ago in the core chip design. Any (minor) speed bumps they've had since then has been via over clock cycling. The G4 is so over clocked that it's pathetic. It runs much hotter and consumes way more power than it should at that speed, especially compared to the new 970 fx at 1.6 ghz. On the flip side, it can stay competitive with this chip at least for this run because even as much power as it uses it is still less than the P4.

Well I really hope this means a G5 is next for the PB.

[CmdrLaForge]

PGWalsh--

I don't mean to sound like an Apple apologist, but I've recently flirted with going to a wintel laptop and just couldn't do it. Quite aside from their being hideous (which I freely grant is a highly personal and subjective opinion), it just doesn't seem to me like they can do everything the Mac does as easily from a user perspective. I'd also grant that I'm far from a power user, but even so, I'm using a laptop that's now something like 4 years old (a Pismo) and nothing has gone wrong with it, no data has been lost, etc.

I have a lot of friends who have wintel laptops and I daily hear stories of how something or other can't be done, crashed, etc. One of the funnier things I've seen was the display of a Dell Inspiron literally coming off in the person's hand as they tried to open it up.... I've seen that happen in class three times now... One of my best friends has a one year Toshiba something or other laptop; he has lost data due to crashes, has had to erase and install Windows (XP, I think....) numerous times, etc. And I fully understand how anecdotal all the above is.

My essential point is that I respectfully disagree with your feeling that the Mac laptops are not a good value. Certainly from a hardware number perspective (EG, CPU speed, etc.) they don't appear to be, but as has been pointed out here ad infinitum there is far more to life than numbers. (And I'd be pretty confident you know that or you wouldn't be here.)

Best,

Bob


Hi Bob,

I really agree with you. You are talking about TCO - total cost of ownership. And thats of course quite different from the initial unit costs. And from my experience in the last 10 years with both windows and Macs, Macs are much cheaper product.

I cannot count the number of times I had to reboot my windows machine or even worse needed to reinstall it.

E.g. 6 weeks ago I got a CD from M$ to install newest patches + Servicepacks for Win2K. A M$ CD. Installed it, rebooted - blue screen. Rebooted again - blue screen. About 4 hours later I got my system back running :( I could add another hundered of examples.

So again, my experience - TCO is lower with Macs.

[Toreador93]

PGWalsh--

I don't mean to sound like an Apple apologist, but I've recently flirted with going to a wintel laptop and just couldn't do it. Quite aside from their being hideous (which I freely grant is a highly personal and subjective opinion), it just doesn't seem to me like they can do everything the Mac does as easily from a user perspective. I'd also grant that I'm far from a power user, but even so, I'm using a laptop that's now something like 4 years old (a Pismo) and nothing has gone wrong with it, no data has been lost, etc.

I have a lot of friends who have wintel laptops and I daily hear stories of how something or other can't be done, crashed, etc. One of the funnier things I've seen was the display of a Dell Inspiron literally coming off in the person's hand as they tried to open it up.... I've seen that happen in class three times now... One of my best friends has a one year Toshiba something or other laptop; he has lost data due to crashes, has had to erase and install Windows (XP, I think....) numerous times, etc. And I fully understand how anecdotal all the above is.

My essential point is that I respectfully disagree with your feeling that the Mac laptops are not a good value. Certainly from a hardware number perspective (EG, CPU speed, etc.) they don't appear to be, but as has been pointed out here ad infinitum there is far more to life than numbers. (And I'd be pretty confident you know that or you wouldn't be here.)




All PCs are not ugly. Take a look at Voodoo PC (http://www.voodoopc.com) or Hypersonic PC (http://www.hypersonic-pc.com/2001/index.asp). Voodoo's m:460 and m:370 are 1.1" thick, Pent-M, 7200 rpm HD, 128MB ATI 9600, and still have a 4hr battery life. There are other examples, too.

I own a 3+ year old Dell 8100. After a little tinkering, I haven't had a BSoD in amost two years. No crashes, and haven't had to reinstall WinXP Pro yet. I know WinME sucks, and WinXP might be ahead of Win2k. But at least I am proof that you can have a pretty stable Wintel (other than a few Dell faults). I also have a friend who's pretty computer-savvy, and his Sony desktop runs perfectly (though he's been eyeing a Powerbook or iBook for some time).

Sure I've had troubles, but none that would make me want to spend more money for old technology. If Apple gets a G5 in the PB, I'd consider. Until then, I'll probably just tinker with Linux.

[adollar]

One possibility is a dual G4 laptop. Since the processor is low power, it might make a good match assuming the bus speed is improved and a good cache match is made.