Motorola 1.5GHz G4... G4 PowerBooks?

[eric67]

you are so right

Originally posted by ClimbingTheLog
Portability

aka Battery life.

The PPC970FX with PowerTune should be capable of increasing battery life a good 30% over the G4 at a similar clock.

Also, Hypertransport. Not per se, but that's how Apple hooks up faster memory. Faster memory is especially important for folks doing compiles and such, which with stuff like fink, is alot of people.

Faster memory == getting work done faster == longer effective battery life.

according to respective Technotes, the new Moto 7447A @1.5GHz is anyway using more power than the PPC970fx @ 2GHz...so you see what is coming.....
according to croquer.free.fr :
- the 7447A will only be used in teh iBook revision (probably available for September 2004)
- the PB G5 is entering qualification step, and should be available, if everything goes fine, in 12 weeks from now on, so, let's bet that Steve will have something new to announce for the WWDC...

the PM G5 revision is still expected for end feb-1st week march

 

[ionas]

Re: you are so right

Originally posted by eric67

the PM G5 revision is still expected for end feb-1st week march

who is expecting them?

i want them, but i dont know when they ll be released, so i cant expect them.

 

[IndyGopher]

Originally posted by oomega1
omg if they put another g4 pb i'm gonna go with PC, doom3 is coming out and i ain't gonna wait. Stupid plan in my opinion i know a lot of PC users who wanted to convert but not at the cost of doom3, i might of waited till summer but not near the end of winter which is gonna seem unlikely with a g4 update. I bet if the g4 update is now it wont be until quarter 4 of dec. or next year quarter 1 to get a pb g5. And computers aren't something you update every 6 months. so i'd probably just get a g5 pb rev 2. I'm so pissed at this rumor now. =/. Waited since last year of august.

You mean the end of 2004? When the CEO said it would be released? Good luck with your PC.
I'm not even going to comment on how the Doom 3 quip makes you sound.

 

[stockscalper]

The new G4 draws 20 watts of power at 1.42 mhz; the 970FX only 7 at 1.6 mhz. Plus the 970 has a much faster bus and can utilize faster ram. It will pay all Powerbook users to wait for the G5 chip. The G4 is only a bandaid.

 

[takao]

Originally posted by IndyGopher
You mean the end of 2004? When the CEO said it would be released? Good luck with your PC.
I'm not even going to comment on how the Doom 3 quip makes you sound.

how long are they announcing Doom 3 already ? a few years ?
i think they will delay again....
if it was released last year it would have been groundbraking...but now it looks like every new game...and gameplay will be the same like in every doom game ...
processor speed isn't important for gaming...a fast graphics card is the key

 

[numediaman]

Chicago Tribune has a nice plug for Dell this morning:

Dell Steps Into New Arena
. . . Dell's Inspiron XPS (3.4 gHz Pentium 4 with Mobility Radeon 9700 graphics chip and a 15.4 inch screen) will start at about $2800.

and Apple is introducing what exactly?

 

[john123]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: other grafic card for new g4 pb ?!

Originally posted by johnnyjibbs
A lot of this waiting is due to the 4200rpm hard drives in PowerBooks. Mind you, OS X is very fast on my machine (10.3.2 seems faster than 3.1 and much faster than 10.2.7 and 8 too) with no lag whatsoever. Finder browsing is quicker than our new Dell desktop at home with Windows XP.

It's still the fault of OS X for being so hard drive intensive then. Like I said, I'm comparing OS 9 to OS X on an identical machine....

 

[Bilba]

I don't think you need to compare OS 9 vs. OS X on the same machine. It is like me running Windows 3.11 on my Pentium 4 computer, obviously 3.11 will run faster than XP, but it is because the OS gives you less and thus requires less processing power.

Compare old computer running OS 9 vs. new machine running OS X, I believe you will find that snapiness is about the same, only now you are getting much more advanced OS.

 

[a17inchFuture]

Re: you are so right

Originally posted by eric67
according to respective Technotes, the new Moto 7447A @1.5GHz is anyway using more power than the PPC970fx @ 2GHz...so you see what is coming.....
according to croquer.free.fr :
- the 7447A will only be used in teh iBook revision (probably available for September 2004)
- the PB G5 is entering qualification step, and should be available, if everything goes fine, in 12 weeks from now on, so, let's bet that Steve will have something new to announce for the WWDC...

the PM G5 revision is still expected for end feb-1st week march

The direct translation of the last line is "8-12 weeks if all goes well".

8-12 weeks. I can wait only 16 weeks at most. When would they be announced/available for purchase if all goes well after those 8-12 weeks?

 

[a17inchFuture]

Also, another question I have would be, if the new g5 pbook were to be announced on the opening day of the wwdc (june 28th) when would one be able to buy it through the website? Immediately?

Or weeks later? Days later?

 

[john123]

Originally posted by Bilba
I don't think you need to compare OS 9 vs. OS X on the same machine. It is like me running Windows 3.11 on my Pentium 4 computer, obviously 3.11 will run faster than XP, but it is because the OS gives you less and thus requires less processing power.

Compare old computer running OS 9 vs. new machine running OS X, I believe you will find that snapiness is about the same, only now you are getting much more advanced OS.

For starters, the "snappiness" on my beige G3/266 in OS 9 is often in excess of that on my PowerBook G4/1Ghz in OS X.

Second, I think the comparison on the same machine is entirely fair. What you call "features" I call, in many cases, drains on performance. I prefer OS 9 fonts to OS X fonts, for example. I prefer the Apple menu to the Dock.

 

[gopher]

Originally posted by john123
For starters, the "snappiness" on my beige G3/266 in OS 9 is often in excess of that on my PowerBook G4/1Ghz in OS X.

Second, I think the comparison on the same machine is entirely fair. What you call "features" I call, in many cases, drains on performance. I prefer OS 9 fonts to OS X fonts, for example. I prefer the Apple menu to the Dock.

That says your Mac OS X needs optimization that you have not given it. Much the same as Mac OS 9 needs a rebuild of the desktop and assurance that extensions don't conflict Mac OS X needs repair permissions (especially if you try to run 9 applications on the same computer in Classic or booting into 9), running overnight, and periodic emptying the cache. An update of prebinding may be necessary after some software installation too. To see more, visit:

http://www.macmaps.com/Macosxspeed.html

 

[stockscalper]

Originally posted by numediaman
Chicago Tribune has a nice plug for Dell this morning:

Dell Steps Into New Arena
. . . Dell's Inspiron XPS (3.4 gHz Pentium 4 with Mobility Radeon 9700 graphics chip and a 15.4 inch screen) will start at about $2800.

and Apple is introducing what exactly?

What they fail to tell you about this new Dell is that it draws 100 watts of power and gets so hot you can fry an egg on it. Plus, it's thick as a brick and has ugly cooling vents all around the sides that constantly blow out hot air. I'd rather have a Pismo than one of these p.o.s.

 

[john123]

Originally posted by gopher
That says your Mac OS X needs optimization that you have not given it. Much the same as Mac OS 9 needs a rebuild of the desktop and assurance that extensions don't conflict Mac OS X needs repair permissions (especially if you try to run 9 applications on the same computer in Classic or booting into 9), running overnight, and periodic emptying the cache. An update of prebinding may be necessary after some software installation too. To see more, visit:

http://www.macmaps.com/Macosxspeed.html

Sorry, but you're wrong. I optimize my system with a certain level of neurosis. I repair permissions far more often than is necessary, and even though I leave my Mac on and awake most nights, I pretty regularly run the nightly/weekly/monthly maintenance scripts. And yes, I've updated the prebinding too -- both through utilities and in the terminal.

And OS X is still slower.

 

[CalfCanuck]

Originally posted by a17inchFuture
Also, another question I have would be, if the new g5 pbook were to be announced on the opening day of the wwdc (june 28th) when would one be able to buy it through the website? Immediately?

Or weeks later? Days later?

Regardless of when it ships, expect a healthy wait for units to ship to all the initial orders. Just from looking at this website, you can see the pent up demand for the G5 PB.

Canon came out with a new digital SLR camera in early 2003 (the 10D) and it took about 8 months to meet all the pent up demand - of course the waiting time decreased the longer it had been out, but it was still there.

So it might take Apple a couple of months to clear the backlog and get down to reasonable shipping times.

 

[CmdrLaForge]

Originally posted by CalfCanuck
Regardless of when it ships, expect a healthy wait for units to ship to all the initial orders. Just from looking at this website, you can see the pent up demand for the G5 PB.

Canon came out with a new digital SLR camera in early 2003 (the 10D) and it took about 8 months to meet all the pent up demand - of course the waiting time decreased the longer it had been out, but it was still there.

So it might take Apple a couple of months to clear the backlog and get down to reasonable shipping times.

And this maybe very true for customers outside the US as we can see on the iPod mini !!!

 

[aswitcher]

Originally posted by CalfCanuck
Regardless of when it ships, expect a healthy wait for units to ship to all the initial orders. Just from looking at this website, you can see the pent up demand for the G5 PB.

Canon came out with a new digital SLR camera in early 2003 (the 10D) and it took about 8 months to meet all the pent up demand - of course the waiting time decreased the longer it had been out, but it was still there.

So it might take Apple a couple of months to clear the backlog and get down to reasonable shipping times.

Yep, but at least I would know what I was getting here in the antipodes, and it would be better than not knowing or buying a machine that soon gets seriously superceded.

 

[Sedulous]

I dunno, there are already pipe-like structures in my Powerbook G4 (carrying heat from heatsink). Maybe the coolidgy stuff will work using these "pipes" but modified to carry liquid?

 

[a17inchFuture]

Will someone please read the question carefully. I posed the question that way cause I am NOT curious about when it will ship!

I want to know when people think it will be online purchaseable, because the 28th is dangerously close to the 30th, aka the last day when one can buy with the edu discount.

So, any actual answers this time, or are we not gonna read this message carefully enough either?

 

[Photorun]

Everyone just needs to get a grip here. July isn't that far off for the new new Powerbooks being introduced. Mind you, they wont ship until Fall like the PowerMacs, I'd rather a 1.5 tide some who don't need raw power over than be sitting at 1.3 for six months!

 

[gopher]

Sorry, but you're wrong. I optimize my system with a certain level of neurosis. I repair permissions far more often than is necessary, and even though I leave my Mac on and awake most nights, I pretty regularly run the nightly/weekly/monthly maintenance scripts. And yes, I've updated the prebinding too -- both through utilities and in the terminal.

And OS X is still slower.

John,
Then I don't know what to say except punt. Something on your machine is making it slower that isn't on my Powerbook G3/233 with 512k backside or my Flat Panel iMac 800 Mhz. On my 17" Powerbook, well I can't say since I can't boot into Mac OS 9!

 

[woolfgang]

John,
Then I don't know what to say except punt. Something on your machine is making it slower that isn't on my Powerbook G3/233 with 512k backside or my Flat Panel iMac 800 Mhz. On my 17" Powerbook, well I can't say since I can't boot into Mac OS 9!

There is no excuse besides a system or hardware problem that one's mac should run faster on 9 then X. Period.

 

[john123]

There is no excuse besides a system or hardware problem that one's mac should run faster on 9 then X. Period.

Dude, you don't know what you're talking about. I've used X and 9 on many, many machines. 9 is simply a faster OS when it comes to Finder browsing tasks.

It's this brainwashing of "whatever Apple says is gospel" that makes Mac people seem so fanatical and overly biased to Windows folks...

 

[woolfgang]

Dude, you don't know what you're talking about. I've used X and 9 on many, many machines. 9 is simply a faster OS when it comes to Finder browsing tasks.

It's this brainwashing of "whatever Apple says is gospel" that makes Mac people seem so fanatical and overly biased to Windows folks...

As soon as you begin a sentence with "Dude[Where's My Car?]" you're showing your hand and your IQ. I don't except everything from Apple as gospel and have criticised Apple many times over the years. I've also used both for years and stand by what I and the others have said: When operating properly, OSX is faster in every way.

 

[john123]

As soon as you begin a sentence with "Dude[Where's My Car?]" you're showing your hand and your IQ. I don't except everything from Apple as gospel and have criticised Apple many times over the years. I've also used both for years and stand by what I and the others have said: When operating properly, OSX is faster in every way.

First off, if you want to discuss IQ, you might try spelling the word "accept" correctly rather than using its homonym "except." This is aside from the fact that, in IQ terms, I'm in the top 1% of the population. Speaking of showing one's hand, it's rather ignorant of you to assume that because I use a colloquial term you associate with people of lesser intelligence that I myself am unintelligent. A class in logic would do you some good.

Enough about IQ. You clearly don't understand what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the GUI (that's an acronym that stands for graphical user interface). The Finder is, for all intents and purposes, a GUI. It translates the UNIX command structure for you, the user, into a pretty interface.

Now really, you can't argue that OS X's GUI is faster than OS 9's GUI on the same machine. You're the first person I've ever encountered that has even tried to make this argument. Most OS X supporters respond that OS X makes up for its slower GUI by speeding up other tasks, its use of preemptive multitasking, its lower incidence of crashes, etc.

If you're in doubt, why don't you try some experiments yourself? There is a program called "Let1KWindowsBloom" -- you can download it here:
http://www.vgg.com/rob/WindowsBloom.html
The program does as you might expect from its name: it opens and closes a window 1000 times. Compare OS X to OS 9. Windows opening and closing is a function of the GUI.

Next try taking 10,000 small files and putting them into a folder. Do it on OS 9 and OS X. Scroll through them in each OS. That, too, is a function of the GUI.

Now try making an alias of your hard drive and put it in an accessible place (the Apple menu in OS 9, or the Dock in OS X. Or you can use FruitMenu in OS X if you like). Go through the hierarchical menus in each...try going a few layers deep. Especially try a folder with lots and lots of items in it. Or better, a folder with a lot of folders in it, with each folder having a lot of items in it. Again, this is all a function of the GUI.

These are the kinds of things I'm talking about, and they are well documented. I am not arguing that OS X does not offer productivity gains for some individuals. What I am arguing is that file browsing and navigation is a well-known and documented shortcoming of OS X compared to OS 9, which is why programs like NetFinder have a substantial following.