19inch LCD's and PowerBooks November 5, 2002

Status
Not open for further replies.

mphatik

macrumors newbie
Jul 25, 2002
3
0
Dallas, TX
Originally posted by Choppaface
so this will probably be the last powerbook that will be able to run OS9 eh? looks like it might be a good time to upgrade...
•••ALERT•••ALERT•••ALERT•••

•••Man, F*CK Mac OS 9.x.x!! 9 is dead!! Get with the program and make the jump to X! People that still wanna run 9 just make no sense. ***THIS NEWSBRIEF JUST IN--> MAC OS 9 is an ANTIQUATED OS!*** It served the Mac Community well for many years so let it pass on ALREADY!!•••
 

chromos

macrumors member
Jul 18, 2002
50
1
Originally posted by mphatik


•••ALERT•••ALERT•••ALERT•••

•••Man, F*CK Mac OS 9.x.x!! 9 is dead!! Get with the program and make the jump to X! People that still wanna run 9 just make no sense. ***THIS NEWSBRIEF JUST IN--> MAC OS 9 is an ANTIQUATED OS!*** It served the Mac Community well for many years so let it pass on ALREADY!!•••
Actually, there is one reason why OS9 is very impt for laptops, at least my Pismo: in order to override the stupid Media controls (or Hot Function keys) that are enabled by default in OS X over the normal Function keys.

Why? I have an app switcher where I've assigned my function keys to difft apps. I had to go into OS9 to turn off the default behavior of "Reduce Brightness" for the F1 key, so that I can switch to the Finder by hitting F1.

If anyone knows of a CLI way of turning off the media controls in OS X (there must be one, no?), I'd love to know.
 

andrewh

macrumors member
Oct 22, 2002
73
0
San Francisco
Re: Re: Re: 19inch LCD's and PowerBooks November 5, 2002

Originally posted by Kid Red


Someone at macnn just ordered the Formac and I'm looking into it. He;s gonna give me a review after he gets it. I will sacrifice the 1" down to get a 650:1 contrast ratio compared to Apple's 350:1. So it the Formac is nice, I'll put my CD on ebay and get the $1700 Formac and might make a little cash extra.
If you want my review of the Gallery 2010 I'll give it to you. I just got mine today, and man, it is simply awesome. Stunning. So bright, and the colors are are so rich. Zero dead pixels. I was waiting for apple to release new displays and thought about two 17's or the 22" cinema but went for the Formac and I'm really happy with it. I'd love to compare this display side by side with an Apple to know for sure, but I think this one is actually better. Or, at least as good for a lot less money. It's 600:1 contrast and 250 nits brightness. Looks awesome in the middle of the Soundsticks. If you can wait until December or January for a new Apple display it might be worth it but you can't go wrong with the Gallery 2010.
 

edenwaith

macrumors 6502a
Aug 7, 2001
687
86
Originally posted by topicolo
I don't understand why apple keeps trying to move their overall price range up... Why do they have to discontinue their 15" LCD? I think it's absurd to consider yourself a consumer oriented computer company when your cheapest LCD monitor is $999!
Exactly. It would be nice if the 15" remained but was pushed down to $400 and 17" to $600 or $700. At least during the initial release, I think that the 15" and 17" would be selling quite well. The 15" would be even more affordable, and for those who had $600 could also get a beautiful and larger monitor. But if the 17" is released at $600 or less, I'm getting one. However, if it is more than that, forget it. I'll just have to wait at least another half year and get a nice, well paying job. Then again, if I make more than $10,000 a year, I'll probably feel rich for awhile.
 

john123

macrumors 68020
Jul 20, 2001
2,483
1,249
John123 Returns...

Originally posted by mphatik


•••ALERT•••ALERT•••ALERT•••

•••Man, F*CK Mac OS 9.x.x!! 9 is dead!! Get with the program and make the jump to X! People that still wanna run 9 just make no sense. ***THIS NEWSBRIEF JUST IN--> MAC OS 9 is an ANTIQUATED OS!*** It served the Mac Community well for many years so let it pass on ALREADY!!•••
This remark irked me enough to bring me out of months of hiding to respond.

Mac OS 9 is not "antiquated" whatsoever. It's a solid, stable OS that is, from a performance perspective, leaps and bounds ahead of OS X. Even if you have the latest hardware (which I do), the two aren't comparable by any benchmarks. And those differences really kick in while multitasking -- an area in which OS X was supposed to, in theory, excel.

For anyone who cares about the speed of their machine (which, in the business world, is proportional to their productivity), 9 simply makes far more sense. It's Apple that needs to "get with the program" and optimize X to make it at least on par with 9. There are a lot of us out there who couldn't care less about antialiased, shadowed fonts. We like our blocky fonts and our Apple menu and our low bit-depth icons precisely because they make our machines faster. We like to be able to turn off stuff (i.e., extensions and control panels) we don't need to make our machines faster.

Don't lecture me on speed not being "the only thing that matters," either. There's a reason why the microprocessor industry is a multi-billion dollar industry. Speed counts. If you don't think speed counts, then stop using whatever computer you're using right now and go pick up an old Quadra or Centris...or even one of the first Power Macs. See how long you can tolerate it. When you have grown ACCUSTOMED to speed, and it's suddenly taken away from you (as is the case with those of us running 9 on newer hardware), it feels unbearable.

It's time for Apple to step it up and devote some of that R&D money currently designated for iApps to OS optimization. If the new PowerBooks won't run 9, Apple won't be getting my money...and I daresay I'm not alone in this regard, either.
 

Mirage_

macrumors newbie
Oct 24, 2002
23
0
Re: LCD Prices b.s.

Originally posted by topicolo
I don't understand why apple keeps trying to move their overall price range up... Why do they have to discontinue their 15" LCD? I think it's absurd to consider yourself a consumer oriented computer company when your cheapest LCD monitor is $999!
No one said you had to buy an apple monitor. No one said you had to buy an LCD. Go to the store and purchase a monitor that is more in your price range. They don't make LCD's. They buy LCD's from LCD makers (insert japanese company name here), and put them in a pretty case. Until the price of the raw materials comes down, the apple LCD prices are going to be high. Its really not under their control. I'd think that they are actually *helping* the situation(lcd prices) by moving to an all LCD line, because it puts more LCD's into the market. They probably discontinued the 15inch LCD because people didn't want to pay the high price for such a small monitor. So people were probably choosing to purchase a 17 inch LCD, get a monitor else where, or use an existing monitor. They are simply cuting out an unpopular item. You're kind of an ******* for posting **** like that when you make no attempt to understand the situation or why LCD prices in general(not just apple) are more expensive than CRT. Just about any technology starts off this way. It's expensive when it comes out because there is not enough demand to just start pumping out tons and tons of the product. As more orders come in, they get enough base capital and confidence(they aren't going to make a billion monitors and have them sit in the stock room?) to start mass production, which means buying massive amounts of raw materials @ cheaper rates, which means they can charge LESS for the product, and make a BIGGER profit. And the price decrease encourages people to BUY the product, which makes them more MONEY. This is common sense. If you don't understand then I guess you haven't taken econ. in *high school* yet...or you're a pathetic 35yr old man who lives with his parents.
 

Mirage_

macrumors newbie
Oct 24, 2002
23
0
Re: John123 Returns...

Originally posted by john123


This remark irked me enough to bring me out of months of hiding to respond.

Mac OS 9 is not "antiquated" whatsoever. It's a solid, stable OS that is, from a performance perspective, leaps and bounds ahead of OS X. Even if you have the latest hardware (which I do), the two aren't comparable by any benchmarks. And those differences really kick in while multitasking -- an area in which OS X was supposed to, in theory, excel.

For anyone who cares about the speed of their machine (which, in the business world, is proportional to their productivity), 9 simply makes far more sense. It's Apple that needs to "get with the program" and optimize X to make it at least on par with 9. There are a lot of us out there who couldn't care less about antialiased, shadowed fonts. We like our blocky fonts and our Apple menu and our low bit-depth icons precisely because they make our machines faster. We like to be able to turn off stuff (i.e., extensions and control panels) we don't need to make our machines faster.

Don't lecture me on speed not being "the only thing that matters," either. There's a reason why the microprocessor industry is a multi-billion dollar industry. Speed counts. If you don't think speed counts, then stop using whatever computer you're using right now and go pick up an old Quadra or Centris...or even one of the first Power Macs. See how long you can tolerate it. When you have grown ACCUSTOMED to speed, and it's suddenly taken away from you (as is the case with those of us running 9 on newer hardware), it feels unbearable.

It's time for Apple to step it up and devote some of that R&D money currently designated for iApps to OS optimization. If the new PowerBooks won't run 9, Apple won't be getting my money...and I daresay I'm not alone in this regard, either.
Nice, where did you the statistics on where apple is spending its R&D money? Oh thats right you've just got your *opinion* which is based on absolutely no data at all. So here is my opinion which is based on absolutely no data at all. There are separate teams working on OS X, and your 'iApps'. They don't rotate the OS and app guys on and off each month. The fact is, I'm sure both teams are working quite hard to optimize their respective products. Now, about not buying a PowerBook if it can't run OS 9. This is a dumb comment for several reasons. And here is why. Right now, we've got the babies and their OS 9 safety blanket. You're scared of UNIX and use some OS 10.0 beta speed b.s. in an effort to defend yourself. Productivity? How productive are you when your whole system crashes and you lose a bunch of work because of one program? Heres *my* hardware: Dual 1ghz G4 768mb DDR, Radeon 9000 Pro. On my machine, OS X owns OS 9 in every way. I haven't booted into OS 9 in well over a year. And I haven't missed it once. While you say OS 9 is a rock solid platform, I remember an OS that would lock up when any application crashed. This is not rock solid. Any one programmers bad code can bring your system to its knees. In OS X, this isn't a problem. Next, I truly believe Apples Developer Tools have brought many many new developers to the platform. Cocoa is simple to learn, and there are TONS of freeware / shareware apps out there from people who are just messing around to learn cocoa. In addition, a move to an ALL OS X platform forces developers who are clining to OS 9 to make the move to OS X. And makes it easier on developers who may have to keep up two copies of their source. I'd say the official death of OS 9 will be when the software stops getting posted for the platform on sites like macupdate and versiontracker.
 

Marvenp

macrumors member
The new PowerBook better be good!

The new PowerBook had better be something special. A few weeks ago I was forced to go shopping for a new Windows notebook for my company. I personally use a fully suped up PowerBook (1.0 GB Ram, 60GB IBM drive).

I was trying to find a Windows machine with similar features in an attractive case. Since I happen to live in Japan where we have all the latest gadgets, I thought it would be no problem, WRONG! Everything I found that was on the same performance level with the PB and with all of the features was dog ugly and weighed as much as my Japanese girlfriend.

But then I opened my e-mail today to find this CNet article:
http://www.cnet.com/techtrends/0-6014-7-20573465.html
Can anyone say PB clone? So the PB's better be re-designed to kick some Windose a$$!
 

vniow

macrumors G4
Jul 18, 2002
10,266
0
I accidentally my whole location.
Re: Re: LCD Prices b.s.

Originally posted by Mirage_


No one said you had to buy an apple monitor. No one said you had to buy an LCD. Go to the store and purchase a monitor that is more in your price range. They don't make LCD's. They buy LCD's from LCD makers (insert japanese company name here), and put them in a pretty case. Until the price of the raw materials comes down, the apple LCD prices are going to be high. Its really not under their control. I'd think that they are actually *helping* the situation(lcd prices) by moving to an all LCD line, because it puts more LCD's into the market. They probably discontinued the 15inch LCD because people didn't want to pay the high price for such a small monitor. So people were probably choosing to purchase a 17 inch LCD, get a monitor else where, or use an existing monitor. They are simply cuting out an unpopular item. You're kind of an ******* for posting **** like that when you make no attempt to understand the situation or why LCD prices in general(not just apple) are more expensive than CRT. Just about any technology starts off this way. It's expensive when it comes out because there is not enough demand to just start pumping out tons and tons of the product. As more orders come in, they get enough base capital and confidence(they aren't going to make a billion monitors and have them sit in the stock room?) to start mass production, which means buying massive amounts of raw materials @ cheaper rates, which means they can charge LESS for the product, and make a BIGGER profit. And the price decrease encourages people to BUY the product, which makes them more MONEY. This is common sense. If you don't understand then I guess you haven't taken econ. in *high school* yet...or you're a pathetic 35yr old man who lives with his parents.

Jeez, what's with all the flames today?
I've seen more insults thrown out in this one day than I've seen in weeks.

You're right, nobody's forcing me to buy an Apple display, hell, even if I had the ca$h I wouldn't.
Why?
Cuz for the same price I can get better quality monitor with a few more features, like another input.

If I wanted a good sized Apple display, I'd go for this:
Apple 17" studio display: $999.00

Or if I shopped around I'd also look as this 19" Samsung:

Symcmaster 191T Silver $963.00

Why Samsung?
Cuz they're the ones who make the displays that go in those pretty little cases you so adore.

LCDs are more expensive than CRTs, but Apple is charging way too much when you look at the competition.

You're also right that they discontinued the 15" cuz of unpopular demand, but why was that so?

It didn't really stack up to the competition that's why.

A comparable (also Samsung) display would have cost about $100 less than the Apple 15"
And yes, that's with a DVI input.

There are two things that differ Apple's displays from others, one is that pretty case and the other is the ADC and neither justify the extra cost.
 

Marvenp

macrumors member
Re: Re: John123 Returns...

Originally posted by Mirage_


Nice, where did you the statistics on where apple is spending its R&D money? Oh thats right you've just got your *opinion* which is based on absolutely no data at all. So here is my opinion which is based on absolutely no data at all. There are separate teams working on OS X, and your 'iApps'. They don't rotate the OS and app guys on and off each month. The fact is, I'm sure both teams are working quite hard to optimize their respective products. Now, about not buying a PowerBook if it can't run OS 9. This is a dumb comment for several reasons. And here is why. Right now, we've got the babies and their OS 9 safety blanket. You're scared of UNIX and use some OS 10.0 beta speed b.s. in an effort to defend yourself. Productivity? How productive are you when your whole system crashes and you lose a bunch of work because of one program? Heres *my* hardware: Dual 1ghz G4 768mb DDR, Radeon 9000 Pro. On my machine, OS X owns OS 9 in every way. I haven't booted into OS 9 in well over a year. And I haven't missed it once. While you say OS 9 is a rock solid platform, I remember an OS that would lock up when any application crashed. This is not rock solid. Any one programmers bad code can bring your system to its knees. In OS X, this isn't a problem. Next, I truly believe Apples Developer Tools have brought many many new developers to the platform. Cocoa is simple to learn, and there are TONS of freeware / shareware apps out there from people who are just messing around to learn cocoa. In addition, a move to an ALL OS X platform forces developers who are clining to OS 9 to make the move to OS X. And makes it easier on developers who may have to keep up two copies of their source. I'd say the official death of OS 9 will be when the software stops getting posted for the platform on sites like macupdate and versiontracker.

I agree with this entire *opinion*. Although I'm pissed that my new Epson printer doesn't work in OS X (only drivers for classic right now and please don't anyone try to send me advice on this; this is the new printer just released in Japan so the rest of the world probably won't see it for several months), I still haven't booted up in OS 9 since the first release of 10.1.

OS X is better in so many ways, I can't believe than people still whine about the speed advantages of 9. If you have a recent machine, the speed difference is not that annoying. Perhaps OS 9 maybe be faster at stuff like dragging and re-sizing windows, but OS X never crashes (on my machines) and I can do multiple things at once like, Render in FCP, while printing postcards in Photoshop, Read my e-mail, while having a large file like Boris Red (Demo) downloading in the background and watch a DVD all without so much as a hiccup (And I do mean ALL at the same time).

And since I was one of the early adopters of OS X, I can tell from experience that Apple is doing one hell of a job with it's progress! Look how long Windows has been around and it's still a piece of crap. OS X is very new and through Classic, it's backwards compatible, solid as a rock, adds amazing features like Rendevous and Inkwell which you may not appreciate now but wait until they have been fully implemented, I can see you OS 9 fanatics eating your words. Switching to a Unix based OS is probably the best thing Apple has ever done!

Make no mistake, Jaguar rocks and it's only going to get better and better!
 

MikeH

macrumors regular
Jan 7, 2002
104
0
Oh dear, what a lot of angry people today.

Unclench people and turn off the Slipknot, it's clearly not helping.

Besides, it's not as if you have to buy these things is it.
 

premalvora

macrumors newbie
Jul 25, 2002
1
0
about possible new iBooks

For all those awaiting iBook revisions (including myself), i think Nov 5 is good news. The G3 in iBooks can easily hit 1GHz and probably will so in the next revision. But they can't go there until they upgrade the Powerbooks with a 1GHz processor too. Sure the G4 is more powerful, but from a marketing perspective, to have a higher clock speed on an iBook would kill PowerBook sales.
If these rumors are true, this gives a new iBook revision before the Christmas shopping season is over a good chance. Hey, at least we can hope.

P.S. This is my first post, so if I sound stupid, be gentle!
 

Foocha

macrumors 6502a
Jul 10, 2001
588
0
London
OS 9 vs OS X has been discussed at length in this forum.

Like it or not, fact is that OS X is the way forward, and I believe that any OS 9 user who gives OS X a chance (on modern hardware) will learn to love it.

Whilst it's true that the GUI in OS 9 is a little more responsive, it's totally incorrect to say that OS 9 is better at multitasking than OS X. Anyone making this claim has clearly not used both systems.
 

ncbill

macrumors regular
Aug 18, 2002
225
1
9 vs X is different on an iBook

I would love to have a G4 in my iBook, but odds are there won't be a G4 iBook until January 2004 at the earliest.

There is a noticable speed difference between 9 and X on iBook
(I assume it's a G3 thing) in system and applications.

And, X destroys battery life (more disk thrashing, only 640MB max RAM on the iBook) compared to 9.

You just can't wave your hands and say it doesn't matter.

Hopefully there will be much less of a difference should we get a faster iBook (but forget 1Ghz, 800-900 Mhz max, more likely the lower).

>any OS 9 user who gives OS X a chance (on modern hardware)
 

Foocha

macrumors 6502a
Jul 10, 2001
588
0
London
What you call disk thrashing, I call modern memory management!

The days when OS 9 or Windows 98 were adequate operating systems are long gone. Whether you're a Mac or Windows user, the issue is the same - modern computing tasks require a modern OS. OS X and Windows XP are both great operating systems - they are both considerably more demanding on the hardware that runs them. The answer is to upgrade your OS and your hardware.
 

designpro

macrumors newbie
Jul 25, 2002
5
0
SoCal
•••ALERT•••ALERT•••ALERT•••

•••Man, F*CK Mac OS 9.x.x!! 9 is dead!! Get with the program and make the jump to X! People that still wanna run 9 just make no sense. ***THIS NEWSBRIEF JUST IN--> MAC OS 9 is an ANTIQUATED OS!*** It served the Mac Community well for many years so let it pass on ALREADY!!•••
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
this is the culprit...started all the angry messages.
i'm just gonna drop in my 2cents.
in my opinion, as a professional graphic designer, i thought it would be just fine to stay with OS 9. I understand that OS 9 doesnt have the best looking GUI but then again thats exactly what i need. I wouldnt want fancy stuff from X just so i have to worry about apps updating. i run Quark 4.11, Photoshop 6 and Ilustrator 9, so now can anyone give me a good reason why to update these to Quark 5, Photoshop 7 and Illustrator 10 so that i can have OS X in place? sure as hell that Quark 5 doesnt run on OS X or does it?
so all in all, stop the angry messages and lets just kick back and wait for your PB. Which OS to use comes in diff. territory, so dont be trashing OS 9 since it gave you so much over the years and dont do the same OS X since you know it's a pleasure to look at those beautiful icons.
and again, to a comment that someone complained about the discontinuation of 15"LCD since it'd be nice for him/her to use it as a pallete monitor, i say go **** yourself. i use a 13incher CRT and thats all you need. dont go outta your way to be a fool.
 

LinuxGigolo

macrumors member
Oct 25, 2002
71
0
Pittsburgh, PA
Originally posted by topicolo
I don't understand why apple keeps trying to move their overall price range up... Why do they have to discontinue their 15" LCD? I think it's absurd to consider yourself a consumer oriented computer company when your cheapest LCD monitor is $999!
See.. the thing is, though, Apple's consumer machines (iBook, iMac, eMac).. none of them have ADC ports. So they can't (natively) use Apple's displays, anyway, and they all have their own displays built-in. So by upping its prices (by eliminating lower-priced products), all they're really doing is creating a bigger gap between what is consumer and what is professional (iBook vs. PowerBook, iMac vs. PowerMac,... and our little buddy eMac over there in the Education sector).
 

Foocha

macrumors 6502a
Jul 10, 2001
588
0
London
Mac OS 9 test

A little test to find out if OS 9 holds up your workflow.

Select any application you like - Photoshop for example. Get it started on a time consuming task - applying a filter to a large file for example. Now click on a menu - any menu - and hold your mouse down. Now wait until the application completes its task, without releasing the mouse button.

Photoshop will freeze until you release the mouse button - as will almost every other process running in OS 9.

OS features like preemptive multitasking and memory protection are not just for UNIX geeks - even graphic designers need them ;)
 

The Grimace

macrumors member
Feb 26, 2002
62
0
Bend, OR
Right now, we've got the babies and their OS 9 safety blanket. You're scared of UNIX and use some OS 10.0 beta speed b.s. in an effort to defend yourself.
Well, there's a mature statement if ever I saw one. How's this for OS 9 as a safety blanket -
A couple of months back our family went on a short trip to 'da Big City' where I purchased a 128MB CF card for our digital camera. I forgot to init it, but rather went ahead and began snappin' away. Didn't figure there was a problem, 'cause the images could be viewed on the LCD screen on the camera itself. The problem arose when I tried to download the picts from the camera. Plug in the camera, turn it on, and... Uh oh, unrecognized disk format? No bueno. Hmm. Lets check it out via Disk Utility. Says its a FAT-16. So, I drop into Terminal and
sudo /sbin/mount_msdos /Volumes/Camera
...scared of UNIX...
my ass, you pretentious f***

Anyways, there it is! Click on it, the picts should reside 2 folders down. First folder opens fine, revealing the folder that contains the picts. Only, when I click on that folder, I get... drumroll please... the spinning cursor from Hell! Complete system lock-up! No way out, the only thing to do is force a re-boot. Tried it a few times, let the cursor spin overnight at one point, figured if it couldn't resolve itself after 8 hours then it wasn't gonna. So I take the camera over to our Win98 PC. Figured that since it was a FAT-16 'disk', it should download from there, and I could just copy the picts via the home network. Nope. The included, updated software couldn't even FIND the damn camera. By now I'm getting desparate, there are picts on this thing that I DO NOT want to lose. So in a final act of desparation I e-mail HP tech support. Their response? Try it from OS 9. What? Oh well, what have I got to lose? I hadn't booted into OS 9 in what seems like ages, but I went ahead with it. Guess what? The camera showed on the desktop just like it's supposed to, the picts were right there 2 levels down, and all I had to do was drag-n-drop them to where I wanted them. Took all of a couple of minutes. The hardest part was waiting for the picts to download via the USB interface. Something that crashed OS X 10.1.5 HARD OS 9 dealt with without blinking.

Here's another: WarCraft III. Unrecoverable crash when played under OS X. Even Blizzard acknowledges this problem. The solution? Why, OS 9 once again!

Funny, OS X doesn't seem to be better at everything, now, does it?

(tig)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.