12inch and 17inch Powerbooks Released

[utilizer]

New PowerBook upgrades

I just noticed something about the new PowerBooks; they do indeed have the new DDR memory but the current G4 processor placed in there doesn't support the speeds the DDR RAM's potential, so nothing new that we didn't already know. The thing that some may have failed to realize at first, like me, is being a Pismo owner myself, I noticed the tendency of users to stay with a machine for a good 3-4 years to maximize the utility out of the investment. Therefore, upgrades are crucial and very valuable. I've upgraded this machine with the Bluechip G4 500 mhz chipset from Powerlogix. Now, the same could be said for the new 17 in. PB; when upgrades are made available for it (possibly a good 1.5 years from now), the chipset will probably be either a 1.4 Ghz G4++ or the new IBM 970 at the same clock speed. It will then be able to support the bandwidth of the new DDR memory. Therefore, it won't merely be an upgrade but a massive boost in speed and a terrific investment, more so than any upgrade we've made in our current machines.
By then, you really won't have any need of asking for a more powerful computer, save for video professionals, and if you do, I'm sure there are some great desktops out there. And DVD drive makers: Listen up! Give the new Superdrive PowerBook owners a chance to upgrade their drives to faster speeds!

 

[User X]

OOPS!

Originally posted by User X



http://store.apple.com/1-800-800-AP...1AqGTCAM/2.3.0.3.27.33.0.1.3.1.3.1.1.0?100,83


When I log in with my school selected this what I see:



$1,499.00

12.1-inch TFT Display
1024x768 resolution
867MHz PowerPC G4

256MB DDR266 SDRAM
40GB Ultra ATA/100
Combo Drive
NVIDIA GeForce4 420 Go
32MB DDR video memory
10/100BASE-T Ethernet
FireWire 400

AirPort Extreme Ready
Bluetooth built-in
VGA & S-Video out
Discounted from $1,799 retail price


$1,679.00

12.1-inch TFT Display
1024x768 resolution
867MHz PowerPC G4

256MB DDR266 SDRAM
40GB Ultra ATA/100
SuperDrive
NVIDIA GeForce4 420 Go
32MB DDR video memory
10/100BASE-T Ethernet
FireWire 400

AirPort Extreme Ready
Bluetooth built-in
VGA & S-Video out
Discounted from $1,999 retail price


$1,999.00

15.2-inch TFT Display
1280x854 resolution
867MHz PowerPC G4
1MB L3 cache
256MB SDRAM
40GB Ultra ATA/66
Combo Drive
ATI Mobility Radeon 9000
32MB DDR video memory
Gigabit Ethernet
FireWire 400

AirPort Ready
Bluetooth optional
DVI & S-Video out
Discounted from $2,299 retail price


$2,499.00

15.2-inch TFT Display
1280x854 resolution
1GHz PowerPC G4
1MB L3 cache
512MB SDRAM
60GB Ultra ATA/66
SuperDrive
ATI Mobility Radeon 9000
64MB DDR video memory
Gigabit Ethernet
FireWire 400

AirPort built-in
Bluetooth optional
DVI & S-Video out
Discounted from $2,799 retail price


$2,999.00

17-inch TFT Display
1440x900 resolution
1GHz PowerPC G4
1MB L3 cache
512MB DDR333 SDRAM
60GB Ultra ATA/100
SuperDrive
NVIDIA GeForce4 440 Go
64MB DDR video memory
Gigabit Ethernet
FireWire 400
FireWire 800
AirPort Extreme built-in
Bluetooth built-in
DVI & S-Video out
Discounted from $3,299 retail price

I must have clicked on the wrong link. I was in the "purchase for your school" store.

Damn...

I knew it was too good to be true.

 

[NitroPye]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: New 12 Inch Ibook

Originally posted by lmalave


Thank you for making my argument for me. I wholeheartedly agree, for the "super average consumer" the $999 iBook is enough. But, um, wouldn't the vast majority of consumers be "average"? So for the vast majority of consumers (including myself), spending money on a more expensive computer that has features they don't even need is basically just throwing money away.

Your a bit above average, seeing is how you acually use the internet and frequent websites and forums like this one. The average is "i use computer for research and AOL"

 

[NitroPye]

Re: Fickle sounds in here!

Originally posted by Prom1
First off I've heard or rather read nothing but hoping for more Video Ram for the TiBook, or SuperDrive within or hoping for FireWire 800 inside or faster DDR Ram. Well we got it all inside albiet for different configurations. Even myself wanted more.

I'm now satisfied that I can justify buying not just an iBook G3 @800Mhz for my daughter & girlfriend to use but also, A 12.1" PowerBook G4@867Mhz. Yes I wished it had L3 cache even at half or 1/4 speed (I have a question about L3 cache, is L3 cache running on the backside bus speed or on the full system bus speed????), but I'm ok. Why?? I'll tell you.

Didnt anyone notice the HardDisk Drive interface of the 12.1" and the 17.1" PowerBooks???? Ultra ATA/100!!!! Yes I'm aware that the HDD runs at only 4200Rpm but IBM is coming out later this summer of a 5400/7200RPM Ultra ATA/100 laptop drive!!!! No longer does the hard-drive half to run at a hurting hickup speed......I used to own a Compaq E500 laptop with 12GB HDD at 4200RPM with the ATA/66 interface. Faster HDD speed faster data gets to the Memory(DDR SDRAM) and the faster the CPU gets it and the faster you can interact with it. Sorry 15.1/15.2" TiBook users

I'm still currently watching the webcast albeit late but wanted to know what is the 12.1" case made of??? Aluminum like the 17"?? or Polycarbonate like the iBook?? Also like the AGP 4x graphics

Now what I'm hoping for is this: Is the PowerPC G4 CPU upgradeable on the 12.1" like the old Bronze PowerBook G3's???? Can someone look into this????

I think we'll see the PowerMacs have 8xAGP if ATi can get the Radeon 9700Pro over to Apple since its 8x AGP already!

Yes i forgot to add this ata/100 is a BIG improvement

 

[NitroPye]

Whether or not you NEED the extra power the new 12" PB is still more power and features per the amount of money. It is a ratio, which many dont seem to be grasping

 

[regan]

SUB or NOT?

I see some people are bitchin that the new 12" powerbook is NOT a sub notebook at all. I can understand the argument, but to me True "sub" notebooks are "sub" standard in my book. The new 12" apple is as small as I ever want them to get!

First off, I'm a BIG guy with BIG hands, and anything short of a full size keyboard is going to crunch my fingers up into knarly arthritic claws. perhaps if you are a 4'11" circus freak. Then again the 17" is good enough for Vern Troyer and hes like 3' sumthin. ;P

Secondly the whole size issue is rendered moot when you sacrifice battery power as well. Cause thats what some of those pc "subs" have. Who wants a one hour battery life? Not me. Kinda defeats the purpose of a portable. Not to mention NO optical drive(dvd or cd) unless you want to lug around more stuff...again...defeating the whole purpose of being portable.

Jobs is right when he says this is the year of the notebook, and that notebooks will eventually surpase desktop sales.

I don't doubt some people want something they can literally stick in their pocket....but it gets to the point where form cripples functionality. If I just want to check emails or stock qoutes, I'll use my cell phone or get a PDA. Otherwise the new Apple 12" powerbook fits the bill. I mean its exactly what Jobs said it is...the smallest FULLY featured notebook in the UNIVERSE.

Personally, I need more screen real estate...so I'm gonna wait to check out the 17" in person...or till they update the 15" to an aluma style with the airport extreme etc. The tibook is so thin, that to me it is VERY portable....but it HAS desktop power.

After I get that...and in a perfect world where money was no object, I would definately get the 12" powerbook when I wanted ULTRA small and portable. Anything smaller than that would just be a toy to me and completely useless. Not to mention a strain on my eyes, hands AND battery.

Perhaps one day Apple will come out with a phone/pda/iPOD thingy...

-Regan

 

[nighthawk]

FireWire 800 from MacCentral.com

"Speed, speed, speed," was the answer that Boger gave as to why Apple decided to move to FireWire 800. Boger said that Apple also decided to implement FireWire 800 because of the added distance and speed that the high-end of the specification provides...

FireWire 800 doubles the bandwidth of the Mac's FireWire ports while preserving compatibility with existing FireWire products. This added speed allows users to use external FireWire drives at speeds equivalent to their internal hard disk drives. Moreover, developers are already exploring other ways to tap the bandwidth promised by FireWire 800, such as inexpensive FireWire 800 uncompressed video editing and fast RAID arrays...

However, the 1394b, or FireWire 800, specification provides for transfer rates of up to 3,200Mbps over specialized fiber optic cabling. Additionally, FireWire 800 can be used over both standard Cat-5 Ethernet cabling or optical fiber at distances of up to 100 meters. Consumers will most likely only see FireWire 800, with later increases to FireWire 1,600 or even 3,200 over copper cabling up to 4.5 meters away as FireWire evolves.

Apple's implementation of FireWire 800 uses what is called a bilingual connector, meaning that it can connect at top speed to other FireWire 800 devices and also connect to FireWire 400 devices [which Belkin will sell soon]...

Streit said that the major benefit for FireWire 800 is the increased bandwidth. "Current drives are faster than FireWire 400," Streit said. "So even with one drive, users can have a portable drive that is just as fast as an internal drive with FireWire 800."

...While many companies have plans to develop FireWire 800 PCI and PC cards for older Macs, Unibrain plans to ship a three-port FireWire 800 PCI card by the end of February. Marketing Director Errikos Tzavaras said that a price had not yet been determined for the upgrade, but that the device was primarily being developed to take advantage of the company's FireNet FireWire networking. Tzavaras said that a FireNet network using FireWire 800 would potentially be faster than gigabit Ethernet at a fraction of the cost.

 

[Rocketman]

cPCI and Gigawire speculation

One of the smaller aspects of the announcement that caught my attention was the mention of compact PCI or cPCI.

It besides FW3 is one of the main candidates for gigawire based on this recent research I did looking for FC-AL produucts (fiberchannel).

--

The LightPulse LP9002C Fiber Channel CompactPCI (cPCI) host bus adapter combines the new generation features and functionality of the 2Gbps low-profile LP9002L with the rugged Eurocard mechanics of the CompactPCI architecture. Like the LP9002L, the LP9002C provides support for 2Gbps Fiber Channel data rates, delivering the industry's highest performance. The LP9002C features automatic speed negotiation capability, which allows complete compatibility with existing 1Gbps Fiber Channel storage area networks (SANs), and allows seamless upgrades to higher speed 2Gbps SANs.The LP9002C provides the flexibility and broad interoperability needed for complex and highly scalable SANs. The LP9002C provides a unique combination of features, including switched fabric support, full-duplex data transfers, high data integrity features, and support for all Fiber Channel topologies. LP9002C also features sophisticated hardware that provides superior performance in SANs, delivering low latency and high throughput in switched fabric, arbitrated loop and clustered

--

This is used in file sharing applications where on the desktop each accessable drive shows as a mounted volume. As these topoligies get denser we will need a threaded mounted volume window!

Notably FC optical has run lengths of 10km and copper line runs of some 30m. Pretty impressive. The hardware costs for cards and switches are north of 1000BT right now but if this sort of technology were popularized for media serving applications and mass produced it could drop to a bit over 100BT hardware prices.

The AirPort Extreme uses IIRC cPCI for its interface bus.

None of this has been hinted at by Apple or any of the rumour sites I have seen. We're talking 1-2.2 GB/s here folks.

Rocketman

 

[Alastair]

I'm seriously considering buying a 17" albook.
Does anyone know if the graphics card and processor are upgradeable?
If they are I think I can justify the expense.

 

[nighthawk]

Originally posted by Alastair
I'm seriously considering buying a 17" albook.
Does anyone know if the graphics card and processor are upgradeable?
If they are I think I can justify the expense.

Given that the Powerbook G4 is about 2 years old (as a product line) and now upgrades have been released for them yet, it is unknown. It may be sometime in the future that the processor will be upgradable, but it is highly unlikely that the video card will be upgradable. Usually video chips on labtops are integrated onto the motherboard -- not a removable card.

Don't let that change your mind about the 17" though, a friend of mine has the 1.5 year old 550mhz G4 and loves it... and he is doing higher end graphics stuff for classes including video editing. Just consider that all computers have a comfortable lifespan of about 2 years of use before you need to think seriously about upgrading them.

The 17" Powerbook is "the best there is" and probably will remain so for at least the next 6 months.

 

[nickgold]

Originally posted by nighthawk
that change your mind about the 17" though, a friend of mine has the 1.5 year old 550mhz G4 and loves it... and he is doing higher end graphics stuff for classes including video editing. Just consider that all computers have a comfortable lifespan of about 2 years of use before you need to think seriously about upgrading them.

Come on... two years of use? I am using an iMac 450 right now. I own a G4 Sawtooth tower that I use for AV. That puppy is a little over three years old now, and with a video upgrade, should last another few. (Although I am lusting after the PB12"!)

Computers get as much use out of them as you get out of them. Some people still sequence music on Ataris and Commodores. Most people also can't afford shelling out a few grand every couple of years!

 

[pyrotoaster]

I can understand some people showing doubt in the capabilities of the PB12", but I'm liking what I'm seeing.

I was saving for a $1300 iBook when Apple released an $1800 Powerbook with the features I want, an even smaller design, a sleeker look (let's face it, I want a Mac my PC friends will envy), a bigger and better hard drive, a better graphics card, more RAM (and DDR at that!), a faster and more powerful processor (plus I don't see much of a future for the G3, although it's had a great run), bluetooth, and AirPort Extreme.
It seems more than worth $500 to me!

I'm still months away from my purchase (unless I can dig up some eBay gem in my closet), and I plan on heading out to an Apple Store later this month to try out the new AlBook (which honestly doesn't sound as cool as TiBook), and see for myself what this little guy is made of.

BTW, regan has a good point about laptop size. I know some people are saying the 12" AlBook isn't a sub-notebook, anyone who watched the expo heard SJ's remark about the Duo, which was considered a sub-notebook. The AlBook is smaller than that, so I say it's more than fair to call it a sub-notebook.
Also, I don't think Apple should introduce any laptop without a full-size keyboard anytime soon. Some people just can't type on a smaller keyboard, and Apple can't afford to alienate any customers.

 

[dguisinger]

Comparing systems

You guys are complaining too much. Apple's notebooks are their most competitive lines.

Take a Dell Latitude X200, Dell's smallest and lightest laptop.

800MHz
12.1 XGA TFT
256MB Ram
EXTERNAL CDRW/DVD drive
30GB Hard Drive
10/100 Ethernet
56K Modem
Windows XP
11Mbps WiFi Ready (adapter not included in price)
2.8 Lbs ** EXCLUDES CDROM WEIGHT
(Battery Life Unknown)
$2126.00


Apple PowerBook

867MHz
12.1 XGA
256MB RAM
INTERNAL CDRW/DVD drive
40GB Hard Drive
10/100 Ethernet
56K Modem
FireWire 400
Bluetooth
54Mbps Airport Extreme Ready (adapter not included in price)
4.6Lbs
5 Hours of Battery Life

$1799.00


The Apple 12" PowerBook makes better sense than the Dell 12" Latitude....which Dell advertises as their smallest notebook.

 

[lmalave]

Re: Comparing systems

Originally posted by dguisinger
You guys are complaining too much. Apple's notebooks are their most competitive lines.

Take a Dell Latitude X200, Dell's smallest and lightest laptop.

800MHz
12.1 XGA TFT
256MB Ram
EXTERNAL CDRW/DVD drive
30GB Hard Drive
10/100 Ethernet
56K Modem
Windows XP
11Mbps WiFi Ready (adapter not included in price)
2.8 Lbs ** EXCLUDES CDROM WEIGHT
(Battery Life Unknown)
$2126.00


Apple PowerBook

867MHz
12.1 XGA
256MB RAM
INTERNAL CDRW/DVD drive
40GB Hard Drive
10/100 Ethernet
56K Modem
FireWire 400
Bluetooth
54Mbps Airport Extreme Ready (adapter not included in price)
4.6Lbs
5 Hours of Battery Life

$1799.00


The Apple 12" PowerBook makes better sense than the Dell 12" Latitude....which Dell advertises as their smallest notebook. [/
QUOTE]

And you forgot:

Apple iBook:

800MHz
12.1 XGA
384MB RAM (from any reseller)
Internal DVD/CD-RW
30 GB Drive
Wi-Fi Ready
Ethernet/Modem/Firewire/USB ports
ATI Radeon 7500 32MB
4.9 lbs
etc.

$1299 only!!!

Apple laptops rock!

BTW, here is the real competition for the PowerBook:

Fujitsu Lifebook P2000
933MHz (Transmeta Crusoe)
10.6" wide-format SXGA TFT (1280 x 768)
With 1600x1200 external and multi-display support
256MB memory
40GB hard drive
INTERNAL DVD/CD-RW Combo drive
Built-in Wi-Fi at 11Mbps
56K Modem
10/100 Ethernet
1 Firewire and 2 USB 2.0 Ports
PC Card Slot
6 Hours Battery Life (with High-capacity battery)
Windows XP Home
3.4 lbs. with combo drive and battery!! (not sure about high-capacity battery, though)

All of the above for only $1678. It's a tough race - the Fujitsu definititely takes the prize for "lightest full-featured laptop". The only way Apple can claim the "smallest full-featured laptop" is because of the PB12's incredible 1.18" thickness, which gives it a smaller total volume than the Fujitsu P2000 which is 1.59" thick.

If you ask me, though, $1700 or $1800 is still way too expensive. That's why I'm sticking with my trusty $1300 iBook - the best value in a laptop in the (admittedly short) history of computers (so far)

 

[caboosemoose]

Hate to be pedantic, but for the $1300 charged for the 12" combo iBook, you could have a Dell inspiron 4150, 1.7ghz P4 512k L2cache, 256mb DDR ram, 14" XGA, combo drive, 30 gb HD etc, radeon 7500 mobility 32mb. (you'd need to pay an extra 50 bucks for wireless).

I don't want to get into a flaming war, but that system would give the 800mhz G3 based iBook a pretty unpleasant beating, raw performance wise.

The iBook may be a nice system (a fair bit prettier than the Dell, but not that much better put together), and it is very good value for an apple, but by PC standards it is not exceptional value.

Just to add to the debate....am I the only one who thinks the new powerbooks are fairly irrelevant. Of course they are gorgeous, and I'd love to have one of each, but surely what Apple desperately needs is new technology in its desktop line. The G4 was ripe for replacement over a year ago and its getting beyond a joke now. I really wish I could justify buying an apple rather than a PC, I really don't appreciate having to use M$ products. But the price apple charge for antiquated technology in their desktop line is simply unjustifiable. God those G4 chips must cost apple about 5 dollars each these days, video cards are comidity items these days, as is memory and so on. At least the apple's powerbook notebook line is genuinely more advanced in several areas versus most PC compititors...Rant rave etc.

 

[regan]

Caboose,

You forget ONE thing...if you get a pc laptop...you get a buggy pc operating system with it. Now who wants that?!

But if you get a powerbook, you get a seemless union of hardware and software. OSX rocks! The new powerbooks are AWESOME...can't wait to see them up close and personal at the apple soho store here in nyc. Also, it shouldn't be long before they update the 15" model as well(soon as tibook inventory gets cleaned out).

As far as desktops go...something BIG is coming. You can feel it. I think it'll be well worth the wait for those looking to buy a desktop.

-Regan

 

[newmanium]

airport cards

i haven't seen this brought up yet, but are the new powerbooks (preferably the 12") still compatible with the older airport cards? i've noticed that the new airport extreme cards have a different design to them and possibly a different interface. i'd hate to have my first $100 investment into aiport go to waste if i get a new powerbook.

 

[caboosemoose]

yo regan,


Firstly i did say that I would rather not use M$ products, and I do prefer the apple platform (I use both PC's and Mac's), but anyone who has used XP extensively will be able to tell you that its actually pretty stable, probably on a par with OSX in most situations.

Secondly if this great new desktop advance is a higher clocked G4 then I don't want to know, that would suck. What I really want to see is a Mac based on either the new 64bit power pc chip, or the upcoming athlon x86 64bit chip. With either of these two chips, Apple would really putting itself ahead of the game once again.

 

[regan]

Moose,

I think that is exactly whats gonna happen. Apple is waiting for those chips to to be ready. Otherwise they would have given the desktop line a wimpy speedbump at MWSF. The fact that they didn't leads me to believe sumthin BIG is coming for the desktop faithful. As the J-man said...buckle up.

 

[caboosemoose]

It would be sweet if that happened, but my feeling is there won't be any new cpu technology for apple desktops until late this year at the very earliest.

 

[lmalave]

Originally posted by caboosemoose
Hate to be pedantic, but for the $1300 charged for the 12" combo iBook, you could have a Dell inspiron 4150, 1.7ghz P4 512k L2cache, 256mb DDR ram, 14" XGA, combo drive, 30 gb HD etc, radeon 7500 mobility 32mb. (you'd need to pay an extra 50 bucks for wireless).

I don't want to get into a flaming war, but that system would give the 800mhz G3 based iBook a pretty unpleasant beating, raw performance wise.

The iBook may be a nice system (a fair bit prettier than the Dell, but not that much better put together), and it is very good value for an apple, but by PC standards it is not exceptional value.

Just to add to the debate....am I the only one who thinks the new powerbooks are fairly irrelevant. Of course they are gorgeous, and I'd love to have one of each, but surely what Apple desperately needs is new technology in its desktop line. The G4 was ripe for replacement over a year ago and its getting beyond a joke now. I really wish I could justify buying an apple rather than a PC, I really don't appreciate having to use M$ products. But the price apple charge for antiquated technology in their desktop line is simply unjustifiable. God those G4 chips must cost apple about 5 dollars each these days, video cards are comidity items these days, as is memory and so on. At least the apple's powerbook notebook line is genuinely more advanced in several areas versus most PC compititors...Rant rave etc.

The Dell 4150 is not in the same product category. You just can't compare a 12" laptop with a 14" laptop. Please go take a look at Dell's 12" laptops (or Sony's, or Fujitsus), then get back to me and tell me if you think those PCs are a better value, feature for feature.

And don't put down the iBooks because they use a G3 - it's a great mobile chip that allows for the 5 hour battery life. Why don't you make similar comments about the 800MHz to 1.2 GHz PIII Mobile chips that the Dell and Sony ultraportables use? Or the 933 MHz Transmeta Crusoe processor that Fujitsu uses?

Now ask yourself - why do these companies - some of the best PC companies out there - make laptops with such "antiquated" technology? I'm sorry, if you don't understand the difference between a truly mobile laptop and a "desktop replacement", then you are obviously not the target market for these ultramobile laptops.

Personally, I think I know a thing or two about value. I already have a desktop (Athlon XP 1700+ running Windows 2000) that I built for $175 - the best value in a desktop, if you have the patience to build your own computer. I'm happy with my desktop - it's ugly but it goes under my desk. I don't WANT a "desktop replacement" in a laptop - I tried that with my previous laptop purchase (a Dell Inspiron 5000), an ugly brick that developed cracks all over the case and lasted only 2 years before the display died. What I WANT in a laptop is something small, light, RUGGED, and affordable. I already went through the whole purchase decision process just a couple months ago, and I can say without reservation that the iBook is by far the best value in a MOBILE laptop.

 

[caboosemoose]

Well, i was extrapolating from the fact that apple charge more for the 14" iBook. So feel free to compare the below spec of the $1300 Dell to the $1500 14" iBook:

Dell inspiron 4150, 1.7ghz P4 512k L2cache, 256mb DDR ram, 14" XGA, combo drive, 30 gb HD etc, radeon 7500 mobility 32mb. (you'd need to pay an extra 50 bucks for wireless).

I could also argue that it is unfair to compare the 12" iBook with Dell's ultraportables. The iBook is significantly larger and heavier, and has a plastic case versus alloy and is probably the only example of where the Dell option is actually better built than the Apple alternative.

Of course, none of these comparisons are like for like, and the fact that just about every 12.1" PC system is designed to be an ultraprotable, unlike the 12" iBook confuses the issue somewhat. I say again, the iBook is very good value, extraordinarily so by Apple standards. But by PC standards, it is competitve, not a stand-out, head and shoulders winner.

P.S. I am well aware of the differences between desktop and mobile cpu's, and I am aware that both the G3 and G4 mobile derivatives are effective mobile solutions. However, if you think that Apple continue to use the G3 in the iBook in order to achieve superior battery life, rather than because of internal Apple product positioning, then more fool you. Imagine if you will that the Power book series was currently running the new 64bit PowerPC CPU. Do you still think they would have kept the iBook line running the G3 in that circumstance?

P.P.S. Regarding the Transmeta chip, it's virtually non-existant. And the P3m tualatin is much faster, clockspeed for clockspeed than the P4 making it a more suitable mobile chip than the P4m in many ways. The G3 is slower than the G4 clockspeed for clockspeed - hardly ideal in a mobile CPU.

roger, over and out

 

[eric_n_dfw]

Originally posted by caboosemoose
P.S. I am well aware of the differences between desktop and mobile cpu's, and I am aware that both the G3 and G4 mobile derivatives are effective mobile solutions. However, if you think that Apple continue to use the G3 in the iBook in order to achieve superior battery life, rather than because of internal Apple product positioning, then more fool you. Imagine if you will that the Power book series was currently running the new 64bit PowerPC CPU. Do you still think they would have kept the iBook line running the G3 in that circumstance?
[/B]

Please correct me if I'm wrong but I don't believe the G3's in the iBooks are any different than those in the G3 iMacs. I also believe the G4 in the PowerBooks are the same as the ones in the desktop Macs. The cache amounts may be different, but these are not like the Intel and AMD "mobile" versions that step down to reduce power when needed. The G3 and G4 are low power chips as they are.

Originally posted by caboosemoose
The G3 is slower than the G4 clockspeed for clockspeed - hardly ideal in a mobile CPU.
[/B]

Um - technically not true. Not unless you are talking about AltiVec enhanced applications. I have a G3 400 PowerMac that I upgraded to a G4 400 a couple of years ago. Final Cut Pro and other app's that use AltiVec got extreem speed-up. Quicken, IE, Netscape and practically evey other app did not.

That being said, OS X's GUI does use some AltiVec optimization and I would not run OS X on any G3 unless it was 800 Mhz or so. So I guess, you are right for OS X users. Maybe I should just shut up now

 

[caboosemoose]

I wouldn't know for sure, but I'd be surprised if the G3 and G4 have the same performance clockspeed for clockspeed. with or without ALtiVec.

Re intel mobile cpu's, there's no difference between the actual core of a mobile or desktop intel cpu either. The mobo's they run on are different, and the chip packaging is different. Also mobile chips produced from the top-end cores from the yield, hence they are clocked down from the speed they would run stablely in a desktop application.

I'm going to shut up now as well!

 

[eric_n_dfw]

Originally posted by caboosemoose
I wouldn't know for sure, but I'd be surprised if the G3 and G4 have the same performance clockspeed for clockspeed. with or without ALtiVec.

Re intel mobile cpu's, there's no difference between the actual core of a mobile or desktop intel cpu either. The mobo's they run on are different, and the chip packaging is different. Also mobile chips produced from the top-end cores from the yield, hence they are clocked down from the speed they would run stablely in a desktop application.

I'm going to shut up now as well!

The G4 is, for all intents and purposes, a G3 with AltiVec added. It actully is based on a differnt core than the G3 but which one is "better" is a toss up. In fact, many app's that don't use AltiVec or much floating point ops actually fun slightly faster on same clocked G3's. (Poke around on www.xlr8yourmac.com for benchmarks) I can speak from experience that the old rc5 distributed.net client ran non-AltiVec cores slower on my G4 400 than my G3 400. (Use the AltiVec core and the thing screemed to about 2x the performance of my 700 Mhz P3 machine though!) I believe the G3 is based on the old 603 PPC core, the G4 on the 604 core. 604 had awesome floating point performance. I think the G3 actually has better integer performance than the G4.

As far as the mobile editions of the Pentiums, I thought I had read somewhere that they are different - with on chip power management that shut down power to portions of the chip that weren't in use and slowed the clock down when it could. I look for a url on that.