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.
Apple Releases New iBooks
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
afields said:
one of the two lines will have to be sacrificed... since there seem to be no more valid alternatives for the Powerbook, why not bring out a cheap but sexy iBook ?
bodeh6 said:
Are you okey? In what sense did you made assumption on which Direct X 9.0 = Core image?!
I could say nothing but,
Get well soon.
Please. Kindly read this page:
http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/coreimage/
Why? I'm very happy with my 12" screen, and there's very good chances my next 'Book also gonna be a 12"... A 12" widescreen, now that would be stupid, since a widescreen has smaller area than a regular screen of the same (diagonal) size, and I guess a 13" widescreen LCD costs MUCH more than a 12" regular...mashinhead said:
mklos said:
Yes, may be we are expecting too much,
expecting an iBook closed to, or even a better one than Powerbook.
Whats being a nightmaire is that, 12 / 14 inch iBook and 12 inch powerbook are all equipped with "high resolution screen" 1024 x 768. Yes. It may be on par of industrial standard by the time 2001 while dual usb iBook released.
You can easily tell, under 1024 x 768 how much working space is left after you have opened essential toolboxes....
For your reference, I didnt see any BTO option to make 12 inch iBook to be equipped with Superdrive. It is only for 14 inch....
In many respects, we have to keep things relative. The iBook update can't be major and groundbreaking, or else they will surprass and be superior to the PowerBook, which just doesn't make sense. So, relative to where the PowerBooks currently sit, this update makes sense and is fair. Now as for the PowerBooks themselves are concerned, sure, they need major updates as well, especially for being the supposed "Pro line" of Apple's laptops, but that's the whole reason Steve is moving to Intel.
spinko said:
It's not just in performance. It's also in specs because that's who Apple are competing against, not themselves. If Apple wants to get more PC buyers to switch, they need to match or exceed the PC specs for spec. And, keep prices as low as possible. Hopefully, they'll be able to do that when they move to Intel.
Huh - well not a thrilling update for sure. Nothing like the Rev. B iMacs with which I'm in love.
I was going to start saving for an iBook now, so I'm kinda hoping that by the time I scrape together the money it will have improved significantly.
Didn't Steve say something about the Intels coming in at the low-end first? I'm guessing this may be the final revision to the G4 iBooks with a switch to Intel announced at MWSF 2006 and shipping in Feb.
*Yawn* Looks like waiting it out might not be such a bad idea. Apple's really going to have to pull some spectacular PowerBook revisions to make up for this in the meantime - right now it looks like they're keeping the iBook intentionally stunted.
I was going to start saving for an iBook now, so I'm kinda hoping that by the time I scrape together the money it will have improved significantly.
Didn't Steve say something about the Intels coming in at the low-end first? I'm guessing this may be the final revision to the G4 iBooks with a switch to Intel announced at MWSF 2006 and shipping in Feb.
*Yawn* Looks like waiting it out might not be such a bad idea. Apple's really going to have to pull some spectacular PowerBook revisions to make up for this in the meantime - right now it looks like they're keeping the iBook intentionally stunted.
Last Powerbook updates:
+11% in 9 months (1.67 vs. 1.5Ghz - Apr04 to Jan05)
+13% in 8 months (1.5 vs. 1.33Ghz - Sep03 to Apr04)
+33% in 10 months (1.33 vs. 1Ghz - Nov02 to Sep03)
Main Pentium-M (Centrino) updates:
+8% in 9 months (2.26 vs. 2.1Ghz - Oct04 to Jul05)
+5% in 5 months (2.1 vs. 2Ghz - May04 to Oct04)
+18% in 11 months (2 vs. 1.7Ghz - Jun03 to May04)
+6% in 3 months (1.7 vs. 1.6Ghz - Mar03 to Jun03)
or summarized:
G4: +67% in 27 months
P-M: +41% in 28 months
Sure, the Pentium-M has a much faster bus and noticeably more L2 cache, but its progress is not better (in fact even worse) than that of the G4, but nobody is blaiming Intel or Dell for their lackluster updates.
(o.k. the P-M bus speed has increased by 33%, the G4 bus only by 26%, and doubling of the L2 cache, which both processors got, was discounted with the G4 by the removal of the L3 cache, but adding the 7448 to the game, the G4 would be ahead on these points as well)
+11% in 9 months (1.67 vs. 1.5Ghz - Apr04 to Jan05)
+13% in 8 months (1.5 vs. 1.33Ghz - Sep03 to Apr04)
+33% in 10 months (1.33 vs. 1Ghz - Nov02 to Sep03)
Main Pentium-M (Centrino) updates:
+8% in 9 months (2.26 vs. 2.1Ghz - Oct04 to Jul05)
+5% in 5 months (2.1 vs. 2Ghz - May04 to Oct04)
+18% in 11 months (2 vs. 1.7Ghz - Jun03 to May04)
+6% in 3 months (1.7 vs. 1.6Ghz - Mar03 to Jun03)
or summarized:
G4: +67% in 27 months
P-M: +41% in 28 months
Sure, the Pentium-M has a much faster bus and noticeably more L2 cache, but its progress is not better (in fact even worse) than that of the G4, but nobody is blaiming Intel or Dell for their lackluster updates.
(o.k. the P-M bus speed has increased by 33%, the G4 bus only by 26%, and doubling of the L2 cache, which both processors got, was discounted with the G4 by the removal of the L3 cache, but adding the 7448 to the game, the G4 would be ahead on these points as well)
macrumors12345 said:
But 32mb vram still isn't enough even for "just" 1024x768 for games even from the past year. I have the previous gen 1.2 ibook with radeon 9200. When I installed Wolf:enemy territory, I was disappointed that even at 640x480 and low detail, gameplay still gets choppy with even moderate onscreen action. High detail stuttered no matter the resolution.
I had a 1ghz P3 PC with a 128mb Radeon 9500pro that delivered silky smooth gameplay at high detail and 1024x768.
Yes, the 9500pro far outclasses the 9200 and 9550, but the 9550 still has enough horsepower to play some recent games acceptably if it had enough vram. With 64mb, an older game could possibly be played at 1024x768 and high detail, but instead you likely have to settle for 800x600 and medium detail. For a newer game with more detailed textures (say Halo), you probably have to take it down further--maybe to 640x480 and low detail.
A PC laptop with say a 1.6ghz P-M and the 950GMA would deliver comparable game performance--that is bad at anything recent, and acceptable to fine for older games.
I'm not really too upset at Apple for this, they probably didn't want the 12" ibook's graphics performance encroaching too much on the PB's. The graphics upgrade was only to get hardware core image support, not gaming.
bodeh6 said:
Not true. The current i/power books all need higher pixel densities.
Every one I've looked at suffers font irregularities particularly noticable at the top and bottom of characters where the edges fall on dead space. I noticed this in stores while using test editors or web browsers.
This effect is Much less apparent on PCs that have the higher DPIs.
Rather sad that wintel boxes display text more clearly than an Apple.
~Shard~ said:In many respects, we have to keep things relative. The iBook update can't be major and groundbreaking, or else they will surprass and be superior to the PowerBook, which just doesn't make sense. So, relative to where the PowerBooks currently sit, this update makes sense and is fair. Now as for the PowerBooks themselves are concerned, sure, they need major updates as well, especially for being the supposed "Pro line" of Apple's laptops, but that's the whole reason Steve is moving to Intel.
Unfortunatley this is the thinking that let IBM loose the PC market completely in the first place. IBM was too concerend about protecting its big hardware that it's PC offerings became non competative, and ergo Dell, Compaq, Gateway et al.
Lots of complainers as usual. The only thing I can really see as something people should be complaining about is that the 14" iBook is not widescreen like everybody was expecting. The 14" iBook is just too "big" compared to all the other books in the whole line. But then again Jobs never said the year of widescreen like some have said incorrectly, he said the year of HD. And not even a PowerBook can play back a 720P movie at a stable 24 or 30 fps, so the widescreen would be only for a more compact-looking iBook and to watch DVD's a little better, not HD. Well, too bad for no-widescreen. The updates are OK anyway, for those who were waiting, finally you can get your iBooks. If I didn't have a PB already I would get one...
These updates are just what one would expect. And it just makes people realize why Apple's going to Intel. No more 0.13 Ghz updates! (At least we all hope so... )
These updates are just what one would expect. And it just makes people realize why Apple's going to Intel. No more 0.13 Ghz updates! (At least we all hope so...
)sw1tcher said:
For the same architecture (same pipeline length), processor speed, bus speed & cache size (and cache speed) are the main indicators for performance (other issues as changes in the processor to bus speed ratio, system controller improvements are much harder to pin down).
I am NOT saying the G4 is faster than the P-M (certainly not), I am saying the improvements to the P-M are about the same the G4 got.
Faster HD options?
So all said and done, I will still grudgingly buy the ibook, because I need to buy a laptop, and MacOSX is the best dektop OS.
Will install 3rd party ram(who the hell is going to give apple 500$ for a 175$ dimm?)
Any userland comments on what version of windows can run in virtualPC on an iBook (to host some VB intensive windows apps?)
If the thing is too slow, I'll prolly flip it when the 7448 PB rev comes out.
So all said and done, I will still grudgingly buy the ibook, because I need to buy a laptop, and MacOSX is the best dektop OS.
Will install 3rd party ram(who the hell is going to give apple 500$ for a 175$ dimm?)
Any userland comments on what version of windows can run in virtualPC on an iBook (to host some VB intensive windows apps?)
If the thing is too slow, I'll prolly flip it when the 7448 PB rev comes out.
My personal take on the late update.
Seeing that iBooks would normally update on April that would lead to 2 things.
1) the 12' pBook sales would be crippled by the update (as we can see from the majority of comments now) being just 3 months since the pBook series updated at the time.
2) with Apple announcing the move to Intel later on in June (2 months later), the iBooks sales would possibly be crippled as well.
So yeah, it kinda seems like too little, too late but I believe that Apple just threw everything she got.
Seeing that iBooks would normally update on April that would lead to 2 things.
1) the 12' pBook sales would be crippled by the update (as we can see from the majority of comments now) being just 3 months since the pBook series updated at the time.
2) with Apple announcing the move to Intel later on in June (2 months later), the iBooks sales would possibly be crippled as well.
So yeah, it kinda seems like too little, too late but I believe that Apple just threw everything she got.
Widescreen? Hah!
There will be no big investment in a new form factor iBook while Apple is giving away iPod minis to any college students who buy a laptop. Beyond that, there will be no new form factor Mac ANYTHING until it has Intel inside. Steve is going to hold tight to that development capital and put it where it can best be used. That means getting Intel Macs to store shelves as fast as possible.
Besides, the upcoming G4s clock about the same as what you can buy now. New G4s might support a faster bus, but there is no way Apple will spend the money to develop a faster chipset for a dead end model. So, folks, this is as good as it gets for now.
However, there will be an Apple/Intel consumer device in quantity before the XBox360 ships. Apple will handle the design and Intel will take care of quantity like IBM never could and maybe never will. Imagine an Apple living room device selling like hotcakes at Christmastime while Microsoft cannot get enough IBM processors to meet demand. That should be enough to warm Steve's heart.
There will be no big investment in a new form factor iBook while Apple is giving away iPod minis to any college students who buy a laptop. Beyond that, there will be no new form factor Mac ANYTHING until it has Intel inside. Steve is going to hold tight to that development capital and put it where it can best be used. That means getting Intel Macs to store shelves as fast as possible.
Besides, the upcoming G4s clock about the same as what you can buy now. New G4s might support a faster bus, but there is no way Apple will spend the money to develop a faster chipset for a dead end model. So, folks, this is as good as it gets for now.
However, there will be an Apple/Intel consumer device in quantity before the XBox360 ships. Apple will handle the design and Intel will take care of quantity like IBM never could and maybe never will. Imagine an Apple living room device selling like hotcakes at Christmastime while Microsoft cannot get enough IBM processors to meet demand. That should be enough to warm Steve's heart.
sundog73 said:
But only that Apple doesn't make their own processors and are stuck with these kind of speedbumps and minor updates because of IBM. It's not completely Apple's fault. Apple knows that they can build an iBook with everything the PowerBook line has. But then there would be no room to keep selling PowerBooks until they can get a newer model out. Apple's apparently not willing to do this at the moment and hence, this kind of updates that many dislike.
If only people complaining were actually in the market for an iBook...
sw1tcher said:
I think the move to Intel will accomplish this on a couple different levels. Specific chip architecture aside, (which I think will benefit Apple on its own), I think the very image/perception of Apple using Intel chips will help in luring PC byuers over to Macs. Finally, a PC user can now take an Intel Mac and relate it better (even if just psycologically) to a PC, since he will see the same type of processor listed in the specs. No more, "Well, I got me a 3.2 GHz Pentium 4, but how does that compare to this weird 2.0 GHz G5? I dunno..."
When it comes to processors at least, PC users will finally be able to truly compare Apples to apples... Everyone, just relax, enjoy the summer breeze (if in the northern hemisphere )
For the people on this thread waiting, somewhat patiently, for this iBook update, this is a great thing to finally occur. I didn't want to buy a nine month old iBook, and that was what my option was yesterday. The old model would have been fine for my needs, but it just didn't feel right to pay the same for something that dated. If Apple just said "new iBook" and threw in a 256 stick of ram and cut the price by $50 I would've bought that too, so boohoo we didn't get a plastic power book, we got an amped up iBook, which I should be happy with for the next few years.
So congrats to everyone on there new purchases
Shasta
PS. Anyone doing better then Aug 2 as the ship date?
)For the people on this thread waiting, somewhat patiently, for this iBook update, this is a great thing to finally occur. I didn't want to buy a nine month old iBook, and that was what my option was yesterday. The old model would have been fine for my needs, but it just didn't feel right to pay the same for something that dated. If Apple just said "new iBook" and threw in a 256 stick of ram and cut the price by $50 I would've bought that too, so boohoo we didn't get a plastic power book, we got an amped up iBook, which I should be happy with for the next few years.
So congrats to everyone on there new purchases
Shasta
PS. Anyone doing better then Aug 2 as the ship date?
I don't know if anyone noticed this already... but with the 512mb and a open slot avalible the iBook max os 1.5gbs. But on the PB 12" theres no slots open so you have to take out 256mbs. The max is 1.25gbs whats with that?
oskar said:
I'm not refering to the cpu/mem sub-system.(haven't complained about that at all!)
Its the anemic VRAM,LCD DPI,and disk RPM BTO options. These are completely in apple's control.
Internal protectionism is keeping the iBook from being all that it can be.
Disclaimer: I am a complainer in the market for an iBook. Will probably order one this week, but wish apple hadn't made the decision so difficult.