Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Aint that a shame
- Thread starter Ensign Paris
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
ftaok
macrumors 604
I agree, but ...
I agree that a 1 ghz G3 would smoke a 650 mhz G4 in the regular consumer apps, but it wouldn't even run the one consumer app that I want to use, iDVD.
Everyone's been making so many good points against Apple using the G4 in the iBook (in the near future), that they'll probably just throw one in there to spite you all. 😀
I agree that a 1 ghz G3 would smoke a 650 mhz G4 in the regular consumer apps, but it wouldn't even run the one consumer app that I want to use, iDVD.
Everyone's been making so many good points against Apple using the G4 in the iBook (in the near future), that they'll probably just throw one in there to spite you all. 😀
It is very unlikely that the 750FX was overpriced, IBM wants to strengthen its alliance with apple.
Also IBMs fabbing facilities are alot more advanced than motos, so making the chip would be proportionatly much cheaper.
Sure iDVD will be faster on a G4 ibook ftaok, but seeing as most of the appz arent altivec enabled, and are unlikely to become altivec enabled in a long time then it only makes sense to run the majority of the appz a consumer uses with a chip that suits them.
The G3 would kick the **** into the G4 at non altivec appz. And seeing as most consumer based appz are non altivec then it makes sense to put a G3 in.
DakotaGuy
macrumors 601
ftaok, I understand that you want to run iDVD, but at this point is it even possible to fit a Superdrive CD-RW/DVD-RW into an iBook case? Until they can fit that into them going to a G4 would be pointless if they can get the G3 750fx spinning at 1GHz for less $$$ then a G4 500, 600, 650 MHz etc. for consumer apps. I think right now they could be using the 750fx in place of the 750cx like I have in my iBook and keep the cost at the same level. The problem Apple would have then is people wondering why the iBook which is a lot less money is running at 1GHz and the TiBook is at 667MHz.
I don't think we will see a 750fx until the TiBook can get the Apollo and get speeds to match. I think the next logical step after that will be to move the TiBook to the G5 and put the Apollo in the iBook. I would not hold my breath however. My guess is late summer early fall for an Apollo TiBook and a 750fx G3 iBook. If they both run at 1GHz the marketing will work fine then cause they can sell the TiBook on the features it holds over the iBook. I would say we are probably looking at around 18-24 months before we get a G5 TiBook and a G4 Apollo iBook.
The priority has to be holding the line on price in the iBook series and I think everyone would agree with me on that.
I don't think we will see a 750fx until the TiBook can get the Apollo and get speeds to match. I think the next logical step after that will be to move the TiBook to the G5 and put the Apollo in the iBook. I would not hold my breath however. My guess is late summer early fall for an Apollo TiBook and a 750fx G3 iBook. If they both run at 1GHz the marketing will work fine then cause they can sell the TiBook on the features it holds over the iBook. I would say we are probably looking at around 18-24 months before we get a G5 TiBook and a G4 Apollo iBook.
The priority has to be holding the line on price in the iBook series and I think everyone would agree with me on that.
ftaok
macrumors 604
I don't know how much the 750fx costs, as none of IBM's press releases mentions prices. But I do know that the Apollo G4s were priced much less that Intel's P4s and AMD's Athlons.
iDVD would be much much much faster on a G4 iBook than on a G3 one. Mainly because it won't run on a G3.
But there's a G4 in Apple's consumer desktop. If they really wanted to use the 750fx, wouldn't the iMac be the perfect candidate for it? My guess is that Apple doesn't want to use it at all. Why? Who knows. Maybe they didn't want the iMac to reach 1 Ghz before the PowerMac.
THIS IS BOGUS THREAD BASED ON MISINFORMATION
The original article can be found at:
http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0202/11.applehardware.php
The original quote from Mr. Joswiak is:
"We're not planning to introduce any new CPUs at Macworld Tokyo, as a matter of fact, we're set for some months now," said Joswiak. "Having just updated all four product quadrants, it's really nonsensical to think we're about to update the quadrants again at Macworld Tokyo."
He does NOT say "no new hardware". He says no "new CPUs" for a few months.
They could introduce any number of new Hardware!
I'm sorry, but I get a little upset when people blindly take misquotes and run with them.
This POLL is bogus and is not based on anything substantial.
No offense intended to the original poster of this poll.
The original article can be found at:
http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0202/11.applehardware.php
The original quote from Mr. Joswiak is:
"We're not planning to introduce any new CPUs at Macworld Tokyo, as a matter of fact, we're set for some months now," said Joswiak. "Having just updated all four product quadrants, it's really nonsensical to think we're about to update the quadrants again at Macworld Tokyo."
He does NOT say "no new hardware". He says no "new CPUs" for a few months.
They could introduce any number of new Hardware!
I'm sorry, but I get a little upset when people blindly take misquotes and run with them.
This POLL is bogus and is not based on anything substantial.
No offense intended to the original poster of this poll.
Xapplimatic
macrumors 6502
No 'new' hardware
I think when they say no "new" hardware, they mean nothing truly new in the sense of "new product".. that says nothing like "no upgrades".. They will continue anotherwords with the same product lines and no "PDA" surprises or digital appliance introductions.. and they will be speed bumping and drive size upgrading along the way until their next truly "new" product (G5 Tokyo?)
I think Apple deploys sophistry frequently to keep the rumors down and the surprise factor up at the shows.
I think when they say no "new" hardware, they mean nothing truly new in the sense of "new product".. that says nothing like "no upgrades".. They will continue anotherwords with the same product lines and no "PDA" surprises or digital appliance introductions.. and they will be speed bumping and drive size upgrading along the way until their next truly "new" product (G5 Tokyo?)
I think Apple deploys sophistry frequently to keep the rumors down and the surprise factor up at the shows.
ftaok
macrumors 604
Right now, there's no SuperDrive small and cheap enough to be used in an iBook. But they're coming, I can feel it. Besides, maybe Apple's working on supporting external DVD-RWs for use with iDVD. (I admit that this still wouldn't satisfy me)
Well, I'm not sure that they could use a 750fx right now and keep the cost the same. Maybe they could get by with eating some margin, but I doubt that they would. And I'm not so sure that using a 750fx would be cheaper than using a 600mhz G4. These G4s are plentiful and I'm sure that the prices have dropped dramatically, especially since Apple's using the Apollos already.
And this is another reason why it may make more sense to put G4s into the iBook.
YES, I agree.
DakotaGuy
macrumors 601
ftaok, thanks I enjoy good discussions like this one. You make good points. Here is one last one. Didn't they offer a CRT iMac SE before they introduced the new G4 iMac that ran a 750cx at 700Mhz? I know since they have discontinued the SE and just market a 500 and 600MHz model. Why didn't they bump the high end iBook to 700Mhz at the last expo when they introduced the 14.1" display. As far as I am concerned the 14.1" should have also included a 700MHz G3 to give it a slight kick over less expensive models.
Of course this too could be economics. If they have just 2 series that run G3's left in the line and only offer 500 and 600 MHz models they can probably buy in bulk and save money on these computers. At $799 for the cheapest new mac you can buy (iMac 500 Indigo) there can't be a lot of profit margin anyway. I still think that Apple should be selling old iMacs at $399 for a 500MHz and $499 for a 600MHz even if they took a slight loss. This is how you get Apples back into the classroom and back into kids lives. Even with all the hype over the new iMac and the new Powermac's etc. The CRT iMac is a great school computer and every mac we can put in front of a kid means future sales. (think about it...how many kids buy a Ford or a Toyota, etc. because their father or mother always drove that brand?) If the price factor is the reason Apple is staying with a G3 750cx in the iBook then so be it. I know some of what I have wrote here does not apply to the orginal post, but just some random thoughts I have had about Apple upgrading hardware at least on the consumer side. For the pros...I say why hold back...even if a G5 costs $5,000 grand to start with for the best of the best...they are going to buy it!
Of course this too could be economics. If they have just 2 series that run G3's left in the line and only offer 500 and 600 MHz models they can probably buy in bulk and save money on these computers. At $799 for the cheapest new mac you can buy (iMac 500 Indigo) there can't be a lot of profit margin anyway. I still think that Apple should be selling old iMacs at $399 for a 500MHz and $499 for a 600MHz even if they took a slight loss. This is how you get Apples back into the classroom and back into kids lives. Even with all the hype over the new iMac and the new Powermac's etc. The CRT iMac is a great school computer and every mac we can put in front of a kid means future sales. (think about it...how many kids buy a Ford or a Toyota, etc. because their father or mother always drove that brand?) If the price factor is the reason Apple is staying with a G3 750cx in the iBook then so be it. I know some of what I have wrote here does not apply to the orginal post, but just some random thoughts I have had about Apple upgrading hardware at least on the consumer side. For the pros...I say why hold back...even if a G5 costs $5,000 grand to start with for the best of the best...they are going to buy it!
Xapplimatic
macrumors 6502
G4s are needed on all Macs.
Look, nobody would even suggest at this point that Mac OS 9 is the future, so it lends well to say, that to truly be comfortable with OS X, all Macs should sport a G4 simply because Aqua is so intense. I have all G3s but have used G4s. There is a limit to software optimization where hardware improvements are necessary to smooth out demanding tasks like Aqua's UI. I'm sure Sahara is a great chip, but truthfully, OS X is optimized for AltiVec acceleration.. and that's only available on a G4. Sahara would have been nice for last year's products. Clearly if the iMac gets a G4, the iBook is soon to follow as they are both marketted towards the same consumer market level. Power Mac towers and PowerBooks are marketted towards the upper consumer and professional markets.. they should both have Apollo G4s within the next few months and G5s before the year is out.
G4 in a 14" iBook only? Not everyone thinks the 14" is the greatest thing since sliced bread.. It's weightier and larger (not a good thing) without any benefit to having a larger sized screen (actual resolution in terms of pixels per inch is lower! It's the same number of pixels that a 12" has (1024x768) spaced out more. The 14" was an idea that shouldn't have been introduced until the DPI was at least equivalent to the 12" or higher to make a larger size and weight penalties worth it so that there is actually more onscreen real-estate... Also note that many people especially those who take laptops on airplanes prefer smaller form factors. All iBooks should get the G4. Don't even think of phasing out the smaller screen or putting it in the back of the bus in terms of features--many people buy it just because it is so space saving! A 500 Mhz or + G4 in the iBooks when the Powerbooks move up to 733+ Apollos would be a good move and would sell more iBooks without really biting into the PowerBook line. A higher res 14" screen would ensure a valid market for the 14". A higher res 15" screen is necessary for the PowerBook as well. It's vertical pixel count is the same as both iBook models.. not exactly great at 768.
Look, nobody would even suggest at this point that Mac OS 9 is the future, so it lends well to say, that to truly be comfortable with OS X, all Macs should sport a G4 simply because Aqua is so intense. I have all G3s but have used G4s. There is a limit to software optimization where hardware improvements are necessary to smooth out demanding tasks like Aqua's UI. I'm sure Sahara is a great chip, but truthfully, OS X is optimized for AltiVec acceleration.. and that's only available on a G4. Sahara would have been nice for last year's products. Clearly if the iMac gets a G4, the iBook is soon to follow as they are both marketted towards the same consumer market level. Power Mac towers and PowerBooks are marketted towards the upper consumer and professional markets.. they should both have Apollo G4s within the next few months and G5s before the year is out.
G4 in a 14" iBook only? Not everyone thinks the 14" is the greatest thing since sliced bread.. It's weightier and larger (not a good thing) without any benefit to having a larger sized screen (actual resolution in terms of pixels per inch is lower! It's the same number of pixels that a 12" has (1024x768) spaced out more. The 14" was an idea that shouldn't have been introduced until the DPI was at least equivalent to the 12" or higher to make a larger size and weight penalties worth it so that there is actually more onscreen real-estate... Also note that many people especially those who take laptops on airplanes prefer smaller form factors. All iBooks should get the G4. Don't even think of phasing out the smaller screen or putting it in the back of the bus in terms of features--many people buy it just because it is so space saving! A 500 Mhz or + G4 in the iBooks when the Powerbooks move up to 733+ Apollos would be a good move and would sell more iBooks without really biting into the PowerBook line. A higher res 14" screen would ensure a valid market for the 14". A higher res 15" screen is necessary for the PowerBook as well. It's vertical pixel count is the same as both iBook models.. not exactly great at 768.