Motorola and Apple

[Snowy_River]

I sold my PB after realising it isn't worth the asking price. I got an eMac instead which is only 250mhz slower and £1000 cheaper! Much better performance price ratio.

You seem surprised that a top-end portable is more expensive than a bottom-end desktop? By that logic, I should be appalled by the fact I can get a DP 1.8GHz G5 PM for £100 less than the 1.25GHz G4 PB. Why should I have to pay more for less power!!

 

[Snowy_River]

For all those expecting a 1.5 GHz G4 in the next iBook... Dont. Remember that this is already pushing the limits of the Motorola G4. The iBook will one day get this but Apple needs a series of upgrades for the iBook over the next year or so as the PowerBook transitions over to the G5. We will probably see approximate speed upgrades of 1.25 GHz in the iBook first, then 1.33 GHz, maybe 1.42 GHz and finally 1.5 GHz. If Apple gave the next iBook the 1.5 GHz first they would have no upgrade path left after that other than to move the iBook over to the G5 as well. By starting the next iBook at 1.25 GHz it leaves them breathing room.

I seriously question your logic. You are operating on the assumption that this is the last G4 update that will ever be. If that's the case, then Apple will want to move off of the G4 altogether. If that's not the case, then Apple will use this update in their consumer machines now, and use the further updates as they come along. Either way, they'll use these now. It would be a PR nightmare for them not to, as the chips have been publicly announced by Moto.

This is exactly the attitude that keeps many of us away from Apple hardware. It is also the attitude that allows Apple to market 3 year old technologoy to the consumer market without any embarassment at all.

...

Thanks
Dave

Dave,

I wouldn't take the comments of one cynical poster as gospel. Don't think that Apple has no smart marketing people employed there...

 

[stockscalper]

I seriously question your logic. You are operating on the assumption that this is the last G4 update that will ever be. If that's the case, then Apple will want to move off of the G4 altogether. If that's not the case, then Apple will use this update in their consumer machines now, and use the further updates as they come along. Either way, they'll use these now. It would be a PR nightmare for them not to, as the chips have been publicly announced by Moto.

I think it is a fair assumption that the 1.5 ghz chip is the end of the line for Moto. Why? Because they reached this speed 2 1/2 years ago in the core chip design. Any (minor) speed bumps they've had since then has been via over clock cycling. The G4 is so over clocked that it's pathetic. It runs much hotter and consumes way more power than it should at that speed, especially compared to the new 970 fx at 1.6 ghz. On the flip side, it can stay competitive with this chip at least for this run because even as much power as it uses it is still less than the P4.

 

[noel4r]

Get over it, the G4 isn't a bad chip -- it's the FSB buses extremely low GB/s bandwidth that sucks and is tanking it's performance.

Motorola has a solution, Rapid I/O, but they are only publicly announcing it for their "other" PowerPC offerings (along with saying on-board memory controller and RIO are the future of the PPC line).

Sucks for us...

The e-Book line and extremely low power PPC chips with RIO and on-board memory controller may be great for their market niche, but their fundamental lack of some instructions and core processing units make them useless for a PowerBook.

The utter and complete lack of news on the 7457-RM (G4+RIO+memory controller) after the Motorola G5 cancelation rumor makes one wonder, since it would have been a great complement for a computer company using the PPC970.

I didn't say the G4 was a bad chip, I'm saying it's an old chip now that we have the G5 chip. While I'm at it, the G3 was a good chip too, but an old one.

 

[jettredmont]

Nah the G5 will be delayed because of cooling issues..not because of some new G4 processor.

Remember the dual 1.42Ghz G4 PM?? If not it's because it was replaced by the G5 in less then 3 months...it was a stop gap processor.

Well, actually, the dual 1.42GHz box was replaced by a dual 1.25GHz box and the *promise* of the G5 in three months. Those of us who bought the dual 1.42GHz machines when they came out (which is, to be quite honest, quite a damned nice machine!) got a good six+ months of use out of them before they were obsoleted on paper ... and a good three months where you couldn't *get* a faster Mac!

For those who care about such things ...

 

[Snowy_River]

I think it is a fair assumption that the 1.5 ghz chip is the end of the line for Moto. Why? Because they reached this speed 2 1/2 years ago in the core chip design. Any (minor) speed bumps they've had since then has been via over clock cycling. The G4 is so over clocked that it's pathetic. It runs much hotter and consumes way more power than it should at that speed, especially compared to the new 970 fx at 1.6 ghz. On the flip side, it can stay competitive with this chip at least for this run because even as much power as it uses it is still less than the P4.

In which case, once the iBook is ready to go to another upgrade beyond this one, in, say, a year from now, it should move to something else. What? Well, I'd say either a low-end G5, or, if it actually exists, the oft-rumored 750VX, G3+Altivec, IBM version of the G4. Please note, I'm not commenting on the existence or non-existence of the 750VX, simply making an 'if it does exist' statement about the future of the iBook.

 

[MacFan25]

As much as I would like to see Apple stray away from the G4, as long as the speeds are improved and heat issues are taken care of, then I think its a fine chip to use in consumer level products.

I just hope they put the G5 in a Powerbook soon...

 

[SiliconAddict]

G5 or bust

Dare I point out that the G4 laptops are still largely competitive with their PC counterparts? Though that won't last.

Umm no it isn't.

http://www.barefeats.com/al15b.html

The Pentium M buries the G4. 1.6Ghz Pentium M is aprox twice as fast as a 1.33 G4 It's possible with an overhaul with the G4's supported system bus it could clean up some of the speed gaps but as it stands a clock upgrade isn't going to fix the underlying problem.

 

[blackfox]

moto+apple

does all this rampant speculation make people expect too much?
I would be happy with an update of current G4 models with a more modern architecture and a modest speed bump(s). The PM could just as easily be left alone for a while, save fixing rev a quirks. Apple finally has PM to be proud of, if motorola (or IBM) can do the same for the rest of the line, power to them. A low-powered G4 with a revamped bus would work for me. As much as I would like apple to have the fastest computers, for the vast majority of people, they just need to be fast enough. For better or worse, raw speed has never been an Apple selling point. Give us a revamped bus/memory controller on all models, a quick processor and a long battery-life (i/eMac excluded)...the apple experience will take care f the rest...sorry for rambling on...

 

[MrMacMan]

One of these things is not like the others
One of things does not belong
One of these things is not like the others
Can you tell which one?

No, we can't.

ionas -- That was quite a list... maybe someone nees to add COST...

If you want a billion features, ask apple to make a custom model... but not for everyone...

The G4 is a slap in the face, I don't know I don't like the speed of my computer ... I don't know.

 

[pgwalsh]

does all this rampant speculation make people expect too much?
I would be happy with an update of current G4 models with a more modern architecture and a modest speed bump(s). The PM could just as easily be left alone for a while, save fixing rev a quirks. Apple finally has PM to be proud of, if motorola (or IBM) can do the same for the rest of the line, power to them. A low-powered G4 with a revamped bus would work for me. As much as I would like apple to have the fastest computers, for the vast majority of people, they just need to be fast enough. For better or worse, raw speed has never been an Apple selling point. Give us a revamped bus/memory controller on all models, a quick processor and a long battery-life (i/eMac excluded)...the apple experience will take care f the rest...sorry for rambling on...

Well, I think many people including myself are looking for better value for your $$$. It seems the PC hardware has better value than Apples hardware. Though most of the computer is the same, the speed seems to be the main difference. When you're going to spend a couple thousand dollars or more, you want to get the most for your money. The classic Mac fan will always tell you it's about the OS. But we're all well aware that gap is closing or has closed. Of course you can argure the finer points, but in the end I think some of us would like to get the best possible for our dollar. Apples' current portables do seem to fall a bit short for the price.

 

[Naimfan]

PGWalsh--

I don't mean to sound like an Apple apologist, but I've recently flirted with going to a wintel laptop and just couldn't do it. Quite aside from their being hideous (which I freely grant is a highly personal and subjective opinion), it just doesn't seem to me like they can do everything the Mac does as easily from a user perspective. I'd also grant that I'm far from a power user, but even so, I'm using a laptop that's now something like 4 years old (a Pismo) and nothing has gone wrong with it, no data has been lost, etc.

I have a lot of friends who have wintel laptops and I daily hear stories of how something or other can't be done, crashed, etc. One of the funnier things I've seen was the display of a Dell Inspiron literally coming off in the person's hand as they tried to open it up.... I've seen that happen in class three times now... One of my best friends has a one year Toshiba something or other laptop; he has lost data due to crashes, has had to erase and install Windows (XP, I think....) numerous times, etc. And I fully understand how anecdotal all the above is.

My essential point is that I respectfully disagree with your feeling that the Mac laptops are not a good value. Certainly from a hardware number perspective (EG, CPU speed, etc.) they don't appear to be, but as has been pointed out here ad infinitum there is far more to life than numbers. (And I'd be pretty confident you know that or you wouldn't be here.)

Best,

Bob

 

[Opteron]

It wont last. a FSB of 167MHz is just way to slack.

 

[aswitcher]

I think it is a fair assumption that the 1.5 ghz chip is the end of the line for Moto. Why? Because they reached this speed 2 1/2 years ago in the core chip design. Any (minor) speed bumps they've had since then has been via over clock cycling. The G4 is so over clocked that it's pathetic. It runs much hotter and consumes way more power than it should at that speed, especially compared to the new 970 fx at 1.6 ghz. On the flip side, it can stay competitive with this chip at least for this run because even as much power as it uses it is still less than the P4.

Well I really hope this means a G5 is next for the PB.

 

[CmdrLaForge]

PGWalsh--

I don't mean to sound like an Apple apologist, but I've recently flirted with going to a wintel laptop and just couldn't do it. Quite aside from their being hideous (which I freely grant is a highly personal and subjective opinion), it just doesn't seem to me like they can do everything the Mac does as easily from a user perspective. I'd also grant that I'm far from a power user, but even so, I'm using a laptop that's now something like 4 years old (a Pismo) and nothing has gone wrong with it, no data has been lost, etc.

I have a lot of friends who have wintel laptops and I daily hear stories of how something or other can't be done, crashed, etc. One of the funnier things I've seen was the display of a Dell Inspiron literally coming off in the person's hand as they tried to open it up.... I've seen that happen in class three times now... One of my best friends has a one year Toshiba something or other laptop; he has lost data due to crashes, has had to erase and install Windows (XP, I think....) numerous times, etc. And I fully understand how anecdotal all the above is.

My essential point is that I respectfully disagree with your feeling that the Mac laptops are not a good value. Certainly from a hardware number perspective (EG, CPU speed, etc.) they don't appear to be, but as has been pointed out here ad infinitum there is far more to life than numbers. (And I'd be pretty confident you know that or you wouldn't be here.)

Best,

Bob

Hi Bob,

I really agree with you. You are talking about TCO - total cost of ownership. And thats of course quite different from the initial unit costs. And from my experience in the last 10 years with both windows and Macs, Macs are much cheaper product.

I cannot count the number of times I had to reboot my windows machine or even worse needed to reinstall it.

E.g. 6 weeks ago I got a CD from M$ to install newest patches + Servicepacks for Win2K. A M$ CD. Installed it, rebooted - blue screen. Rebooted again - blue screen. About 4 hours later I got my system back running I could add another hundered of examples.

So again, my experience - TCO is lower with Macs.

 

[Toreador93]

PGWalsh--

I don't mean to sound like an Apple apologist, but I've recently flirted with going to a wintel laptop and just couldn't do it. Quite aside from their being hideous (which I freely grant is a highly personal and subjective opinion), it just doesn't seem to me like they can do everything the Mac does as easily from a user perspective. I'd also grant that I'm far from a power user, but even so, I'm using a laptop that's now something like 4 years old (a Pismo) and nothing has gone wrong with it, no data has been lost, etc.

I have a lot of friends who have wintel laptops and I daily hear stories of how something or other can't be done, crashed, etc. One of the funnier things I've seen was the display of a Dell Inspiron literally coming off in the person's hand as they tried to open it up.... I've seen that happen in class three times now... One of my best friends has a one year Toshiba something or other laptop; he has lost data due to crashes, has had to erase and install Windows (XP, I think....) numerous times, etc. And I fully understand how anecdotal all the above is.

My essential point is that I respectfully disagree with your feeling that the Mac laptops are not a good value. Certainly from a hardware number perspective (EG, CPU speed, etc.) they don't appear to be, but as has been pointed out here ad infinitum there is far more to life than numbers. (And I'd be pretty confident you know that or you wouldn't be here.)

All PCs are not ugly. Take a look at Voodoo PC or Hypersonic PC. Voodoo's m:460 and m:370 are 1.1" thick, Pent-M, 7200 rpm HD, 128MB ATI 9600, and still have a 4hr battery life. There are other examples, too.

I own a 3+ year old Dell 8100. After a little tinkering, I haven't had a BSoD in amost two years. No crashes, and haven't had to reinstall WinXP Pro yet. I know WinME sucks, and WinXP might be ahead of Win2k. But at least I am proof that you can have a pretty stable Wintel (other than a few Dell faults). I also have a friend who's pretty computer-savvy, and his Sony desktop runs perfectly (though he's been eyeing a Powerbook or iBook for some time).

Sure I've had troubles, but none that would make me want to spend more money for old technology. If Apple gets a G5 in the PB, I'd consider. Until then, I'll probably just tinker with Linux.

 

[adollar]

Dual G4 Laptop

One possibility is a dual G4 laptop. Since the processor is low power, it might make a good match assuming the bus speed is improved and a good cache match is made.