1.5 vs 1.67 PBs - maccentral suggests little difference

[jsw]

And all those who think the upgrade is terrible should be jumping for joy at the refurb market. I mean, the old ones were better, right?

 

[Wonder Boy]

BTW, I am putting my money where my mouth is. I'll be buying a 17" Powerbook within the next 30-60 days. I anticipate that it will be "obsolete" within a few months after that when the "next big thing" comes out.

if i was in the market, i'd be waiting for rev b of the next big thing, making my wait that much longer. i just dont trust rev a anymore.

 

[mineis17inches]

yup

Those benchmarks don't surprise me. The only good thing between the 1.5's and the new ones is the new price. If anyone is in the market for a PowerBook, have a look around for a 1.5Ghz model with the faster HD, and you will get more of a bargain!!

aussie_geek

That's what I thought of when I bought my 17er, it has the 128 meg 9700 (only difference is no 30 inch cinema support but who the hell plugs that into a laptop anyway?) it has the 5400 rpm drive and other than that the only difference is the 170 mghz. Well that and DVD±R capability. And Bluetooth 2.0...So while these current models exist, my resale value will be pretty good.

This speedbump is only here to fill the void for the G5 which will not be for a while now cause we just had an update, right? Yeah we're lookin at June at the earliest.

 

[berner]

sorry, caveman

Whoever said these chips are overclocked is sadly mistaken. A while back a guy on here posted an awesome point on the different g4 chips and it started with this: The question was are the 1.33 the 1.5 the same chip but one is just overclocked. The answer was no. The chips come off the line all making different numbers. Some come out making 1.23 some come out making 1.45 some come out making 1.67. It all varies. These chips are not overclocked.

the current PB chips are almost identical to what is being used in the new mac mini(in architecture not clock speeds) and here is a picture of a mac mini chip getting overclocked.
http://www.lbodnar.dsl.pipex.com/macmini/
[according to apple-history: pb family= freescale 7447a, mac mini= 7447]
if the powerbooks are supposed to represent the leading edge of laptop performance than they would have been running at 1.67 9 months ago.

 

[therevolution]

Don't need one enough so I'll wait as long as I can.

Sounds like someone doesn't like it when people disagree with them. You must think your opinion is the only one that matters. That's quite an ego you have going there. God forbid someone doesn't think everything Apple releases is gold. Get a grip. This is the real world and Apple dropped the ball plain and simple. Deal with it.

Deal with what? You're the one complaining about how terrible they are. I never disagreed with you; in fact, I basically feel the same way you do. I'm not thrilled with the hardware either. But what's your complaining going to solve? I'm not some Apple fanatic who thinks they can do no wrong, but I'm sick of seeing people whine about the same old things.

Apple hardware has always been priced higher than PC hardware. If you're waiting for some magical update to change that, you'll be waiting quite a while. I think the updates are fine, considering the few features they did add along with the price drop. You don't? Good for you.

No need to get catty, either. I just tried to point out the positive, but since you seem so intent on bashing the PowerBooks for the sake of bashing them... why bother?

 

[joshua_msu]

10 months waiting for this??????????????


HAHA, gotta be kidding me. This should have been the upgrade one year ago.

 

[mcgarry]

Just for kicks, how about a wee look back in time:

Mac born, using 68000 chip, 1984
Mac II, first mac with 68020 chip, March 1987
Mac IIx, first mac with 68030 chip, September 1988
Mac Portable, first officially portable Mac, with 68000 chip, September 1989

Quadras 700 and 900, first Macs with 68040 chip, October 1991
PowerBooks 140 and 170, first PowerBooks (with 68030 chip), October 1991

PowerMacs 6100/7100/8100, first PowerPC (601) Macs, March 1994
PowerBooks 520/540, with 68040 chip, May 1994

PowerMacs 8500/9500, PowerPC 604, August 1995
PowerBook 5300 series, first PowerPC (603e) PowerBooks, August 1995

THE EXCEPTION:
PowerMac G3, November 1997
PowerBook G3, November 1997

PowerMacs G4, September 1999
PowerBook G4, January 2001

PowerMac G5, June 2003
PowerBook ___ ???


Please note this is more than a little tongue-in-cheek, and I certainly may have missed a few details or gotten a number wrong here and there.

I am not suggesting that every chip is created equal or that the history determines the future, but simply that this apparent lag in moving from the G4 is not without precedent, and is actually pretty normal in Mac-land. I'm aware that there are a ton of stories and important factors behind each of these dates; I'm just being general here; there are other ways of slicing it. I'm not saying this is good or bad, that's just the way it has been, and is, though of course it could be different. What's my point? Personally, sure, I'd like to see better PowerBooks, but I'm not about to set the roof on fire over it.

 

[maxvamp]

Powerbooks need a Power processor!!

Howabout a Powerbook with a Power5?? Ok, in might be about 10" thick and weight 45 lbs... But how cool would that be??!!!


Actually, IBM looks to be using a 64Bit altivec enabled processor as the core of the Cell proc. Yes, it is a little stripped ( i believe that it's base logic core was compared to the PPC 601 ), but ....

- The G4 74xx series is really long in the tooth, primarily due to the bus speed.
- Freescale does have a 32-bit proc that solved this problem, but it requires a board redesign, and I am not sure that;
a) Freescale can reliably produce processors,
b) Apple wants to stay 32-bit ( if for no other reason, marketing )

- IBM looks to be aggressively trying to retake the PPC market, and logically should be trying to get back into the embedded market with something more than a 750xx

I would not be surprised if IBM releases an embedded processor that is 64-Bit with VMX. I doubt this would be a derivative of the 970. Couple that with the stopgap release that this PowerBook release obviously is, and I would not be surprised to be surprised with something other than the obvious this summer.

Just my 2 cents ( and ramblings )
Max.

 

[aswitcher]

Well its nice to know my now superceeded machine aint that much behind the leaders...

Would like to have 2 finger scroll, brighter backlight and 100 gig HDD, but its a fine machine without these...

 

[edgarj]

PowerBooks are truly dated

My 12" PB G4 1.25 has become virtually useless for what I need it for (CPU intensive scientific analysis, FlowJo software mainly). I can crunch 3-4 times the data on my dual 2.5 or the Xeon's in the lab, and even mundane web browsing, file duplication, image editing, etc seems painfully sluggish on the PB. Transitioning to my PB each night is harsh! The performance spread between workstation and laptop is much slimmer on the PC side, and this is becoming a crisis issue for apple. I love my super-sleek PB, but for what I make a living doing, I'd settle for a clunky but fast option any day (pretty much what the the fast PC laptops have delivered recently). The PB is just another "digital lifestyle" device as it stands, and while fine for many, it is screwing those who truly need the CPU power and I'm already seeing some niche software im my field (traditionally very macentric) offering PC versions for the first time ever. Why not just build (for now) an 8 pound dual G4 mobile workstation for the interim and ditch it when the technology allows... its like Apple's focus has become nothing but the superficial. I love the design and perfectionist element of Apple's products, but much of their base is in professional applications that require performance, and there simply is no Apple laptop for that market as of now. I'm through waiting and am going to have to get another desktop for home. Glad those handles are built in on the PowerMac's.

 

[maxvamp]

Why not just build (for now) an 8 pound dual G4 mobile workstation for the interim and ditch it when the technology allows.

The 133 Bus would still be a heavy impediment, and offer very little help in your situation.

I have to say that I am a little surprised that anyone would want to do heavy scientific calcs on a laptop. Usually, laptops are net the best in design for very long heavy processor usage. I believe that usually the heat distribution systems are more optimized for a lot of CPU idle time.

Max.

 

[alset]

WORST-- UPGRADE-- EVAR!!!

OK, I'll bite.... Price came down, features went up. If it doesn't satisfy you, don't buy it. Those who wish for a more powerful machine for their money should either buy a desktop system (this should be obvious) or sink cash into whatever alternative seems so convenient to cite.

Obviously, you use a Mac for a reason. OS X and iApps are not an excuse for performance. Design is not an excuse for performance. Performance is a means to enjoy the experience.

I find performance more than acceptable on older hardware and outstanding on new hardware. If you feel that you have been taken advantage of, please put your money where your mouth is and purchase a different platform.

 

[SurfAddict]

Not Slow

Now I'm an avid windows laptop user seeing as we have 4 sitting around my house one of which is a brand new Qosmio 17" with HD screen and all and u kno wut its damn nice. But the execution of the laptop of being a laptop just isnt all that great. I just got this 17" on monday ( ordered last monday) and it runs great no probs at all. This thing has plenty of speed for me ( Final Cut Express, Logic, WoW are the roughest on it) I understand that some of you guys need proccesor speed but all those PC laptops in my house are around at least 2" thick and weigh in around 10 pounds. How do you expect apple to get that powerful of components into a laptop that is this thin. This is my first mac and I love it I got 3hrs of batt life today on highest performance settings, that 17 Qosmio gets around 40 mins on energy saver. So no its not a dual-core g4 (which i wanted so badly) but it does pretty damn well much better than my 20" iMac G4 also the last revision.

The iMac belongs to another family member I have had very limited time with it but from what ive seen in iPhoto i can smack around the iMac handily

 

[edgarj]

The 133 Bus would still be a heavy impediment, and offer very little help in your situation.

I have to say that I am a little surprised that anyone would want to do heavy scientific calcs on a laptop. Usually, laptops are net the best in design for very long heavy processor usage. I believe that usually the heat distribution systems are more optimized for a lot of CPU idle time.

Max.

Actually, the Dell XPS laptop and the like some colleagues are using for the same software screams on FPU intensive tasks….. very close to my dual 2.5, ugly and nearly 10lbs, but very portable still. The endpoint quicksilver G4's do very well with FPU intensive tasks, so it isn't just FSB/memory's game that is lagging in the PB. The CPU is relatively ancient. There are MANY professional applications demanding both performance and mobility, so site specific desktop workstations isn't always a solution. I spend around 1/8 of my life at conferences, as do many scientists, and the concept of a "laptop workstation" is not science fiction. The PC industry derives form from function, albeit with no attention to aesthetic or battery life. The Apple directive of making the technology conform to a size/style format is always going to yield big lag periods with every CPU generation. This current generation is a thermal/energy nightmare, and the lag is long and still counting... but two G4's (w/ little emphasis on power management) is todays technology if the wrapper wasn't more important to Apple than the candy bar. My PB is a dream for surfing the web at the airport, but I don't word-process or web browse for a living, and it is a dinosaur for any task not tolerating three-year-old performance. Rant tank empty.

 

[Xtremehkr]

I know it is not what most people wanted. But how much more unhappy would you be with a PBG5 that literally melted in your lap?

 

[Demon Hunter]

Nothing else really separates the lines. (well, apart from shinyness).

I agree though, we should definitely NOT compare ibook or powerbook to PC lappies, at which point they both look pathetic (and I'm an Apple fan). The next person to tell me that a G4 1.5 is anything CLOSE to a P-M 1.5 gets shot. Honestly.

Cemil, you're my new hero.

You should check out what I have going here. Being a mobile Mac gamer, that's like a triple whammy, but what can I say I'm a masochist.

Edgarj makes a lot of good points. It saddens me that my Powerbook feels like more of a fancy watch than a cutting-edge notebook computer.

But I have faith, they must have something big up their sleeves for WWDC. If they don't, I fear for the professional segment that Edgarj refers to... these people rely on Mac OS X, and to see Apple lose the scientific community (along with others) would be devastating, and is really not that far from reality...

 

[MillieWales]

That link will enable the new "two finger scrolling" on older powerbooks. It's just a software feature anyways, not a hardware one.

It is a feature, but ultimately the hardware is new, the keyboard and trackpad were ADB and are now USB I believe.


Ultimately, I don't get why people are moaning. you get more machine for less money, I do see that it isn't a super upgrade, but it was not announced as one either. If it was annopunced in a blaze of glory at a keynote then fair enough, but they just slipped onto the site one day. If you have a 1.5Gig then no, you are not really missing out, if you have just paid for a 1.5Gig you may feel annoyed that you could have got a couple of new features and more Ram for less money, which is true but then that's the same with so many big purcahses you can make. If you have an older computer and wanted to upgrade you will be glad of the updates, as you get slightly more for slightly less - never a bad thing right?

People can't really have expected better benchmark results than shown here can they? A small upgrade will obviously only give a small upgrade in performance. It's a bit like going out to buy a new BMW, you find that the models you are interested in all have 10% more power, a slightly bigger fuel tank and a couple of extra gimmicks and they have taken a bit off of the price, anyone about to buy won't say no, as they were interested anyway, anyone who had just bought won't be too gutted as they still have a great car, and ultimately it 10% power boost does not mean 10% faster, either top end or away from the lights. If the BMW was not the car for you though and you wanted more power, a different shape, a new interior, you would just have to wait until the bring out the latest model - maybe that will be the new BMW G5, maybe it will be a Dual Engine!

 

[bbyrdhouse]

I have got to stop reading threads like this.

I ordered my very first Mac on February 7, 2005. And it was a Powerbook 15", 1.67 maxed out with edu pricing. I have been like a kid waiting on Christmas ever since I ordered it, but as I read these threads I begin to wonder if the $2,500.00 I just spent was a waste.

But I read other threads and folks are as excited about the new releases as others are diappointed.

Since this is my first Mac I for one have decided that I will be excited and happy.

 

[ASP272]

Nothing to see here . . . Move on people . . . Nothing to see

No surprises here.

 

[John Rivers]

Quick advice on what to buy?

Alright the new Powerbooks look nice and fancy, and as a student, I can dig the cheap price.

I was wondering if any experienced mac users can help me out with something (currently PC user, wanna "switch"). I haven't had much experience with the apparently dreaded "Revision A" Apple product people seem to be afraid of. I am likely studying abroad next semester (so, September-ish) and would like a nice laptop to bring with me, something good which I can edit some video (Final Cut preferably cause I probably one day will get into film), record and mix music, and play the only game I really see myself playing for a long time, World of Warcraft ( ). So, should I just jump on these new powerbooks now and enjoy the final G4 powerbook in all its updated revised and perfected glory, or wait a few months till a *new* powerbook be released and take my chances there? Opinions? Thanks

 

[BenRoethig]

Apple is at the mercy of the chip manufacturers here. I have so been hoping for the 7448 freescale chip to be ready, i'm sure that is why they held out for so long with this last update. Alas, it obviously didn't meet the deadline. so instead, here is a suckass lite overclock of an already straining chip with some fancy extras to make you forget that this upgrade was possible 9 months ago. so if freescale hasn't got the 7448 ready now, that doesn't look great for the dualcore g4's in the near future either. Damn i wish they could get ahead of the curve here! Same same for the G5 in the powermacs, its all up to IBM, if antares isn't ready soon, expect a price drop and some other lame "features" in a minor powermac upgrade.
it sucks to have some one else set the timelines, when all the hardware is around in good quantities apple happily schedules speedbumps every 6 months (my observation of the ibook line, which uses the cpus that the PB's no longer need).

Kevin in Canada

The 7448 is a regular G4 with another Bus bump. There won't be much of speed increase until the 8600 series or another all new design is fielded.

 

[sbb155]

THE BEST DEAL...

It seems like the best way to spend $2500 now is to buy a Powermac G5 or an Imac G5 for your desk, and a 12" ibook for travel, instead of a loaded PB.... Of course the PB is so much sexier...

 

[sirjimithy1]

Anyone complaining about how insignificant the hardware upgrades are is obviously missing the point. Plain and simple. Apple's main focus since MWSF '05 has been to put things in a competative price rance with Wintel alternatives. Mac mini, iPod Shuffle, etc. Putting two new hardware features (Sudden Motion Sensor, scrolling trackpad) along with slight performace boosts (SLIGHT) while simultaneously dropping the price is a feat for any company. I was planning to buy a PowerBook before, but I'm more impressed now that I'm getting a better PowerBook for less money. Look at the big picture, people. 15" 1.67 GHz here I come!

 

[bbyrdhouse]

Anyone complaining about how insignificant the hardware upgrades are is obviously missing the point. Plain and simple. Apple's main focus since MWSF '05 has been to put things in a competative price rance with Wintel alternatives. Mac mini, iPod Shuffle, etc. Putting two new hardware features (Sudden Motion Sensor, scrolling trackpad) along with slight performace boosts (SLIGHT) while simultaneously dropping the price is a feat for any company. I was planning to buy a PowerBook before, but I'm more impressed now that I'm getting a better PowerBook for less money. Look at the big picture, people. 15" 1.67 GHz here I come!

Thats the way that I am looking at it.

And who knows several months down the road maybe I can sell it on e-bay and get close to what I paid for it and get the newer revision???

 

[sirjimithy1]

Thats the way that I am looking at it.

And who knows several months down the road maybe I can sell it on e-bay and get close to what I paid for it and get the newer revision???

Yeah, Apple hardware holds its value very well

Example 1
Example 2
Example 3

Can Windoze users sell a 3 year old laptop for over $1000? I think not.