PowerBook and iBook Confirmation?

[Snowy_River]

...I can't disclose evidence here... Nevertheless, I can flatly assure you that there will be no G5 PowerBook in 2004...

Sorry, elo, laying down blanket statements like this doesn't cut the mustard. Offer a reason why.

This is not to say that I definitely believe that there will be a G5 PB any time soon. Just that I find people saying things like this to be irritating, if nothing else.

 

[HiRez]

Trust me, any G4 with speeds above 800 is plenty of processing power for current OS X apps. I am a recent switcher and my DP 867 PowerMac has been plenty fast. I don't think Mac users have reduced speed expectations. I don't even know what you mean by that. Are you referring to raw numbers or actual performance? Maybe a Maya/Lightwave3D user like you cares only for top speed

I generally agree with you, however one "non-high-end" app that does seem like a resource hog is GarageBand. I don't own it yet but I played around with it on a 1.25 GHz iMac at an Apple store and it brought that machine to its knees...very sluggish. Which is odd because I still do a lot of my work on an "old" 800 MHz TiBook, including Cinema4D, After Effects, Photoshop, and Cubase SX, and those all perform well. Some of GarageBand's problems are just the first-version blues I think. For example, it was using ~28% of the CPU when completely idle. It should get better with time.

 

[Awimoway]

For all those who said, 'I won't believe it until ThinkSecret says they're coming...'

Indeed. That's solid confirmation. Now I'm 100% sure. Which brings to mind a new question.

Why Monday? Updates have traditionally always been on Tuesdays. And that brings to mind a second question.

What time, Monday? Since no press conference is announced, and since by all accounts these are just modest speed bumps, I would assume it will be like all other speed bump releases, with a quiet update of the Apple Store in the morning and perhaps the website main page will feature the new additions.

But since the Tuesday pattern isn't being followed, it makes me wonder if any other patterns will be changed as well.

 

[James_C]

I am looking forward to these updates. I think these notebooks are important to Apple to try to increase market share, I helped switch one person to an iBook recently and another potential switcher is considering the 15" Powerbook. Now that wireless networking is catching on, people like the freedom of a laptop. Roll on the updates on Monday.

 

[fener]

"Croquer la pomme" just posted some tentative prices for the new laptops in Europe/France. The prices seem to be lower as well (probably to offset the demand for Powerbook G5, which they won't meet). If the price drops in Europe are indicative of the prices in the US, the new prices would be as follows ( I rounded off to more common price points for Apple, for example $1499 instead of $1490):

M9426LL/A iBook 12, 1 Ghz $1,099
M9418LL/A iBook 14, Combo, 1.25 Ghz $1,250
M9419LL/A iBook 14, Superdrive, 1.33Ghz Unknown

M9183LL/A Powerbook 12 Combo 1.33 Ghz Unknown
M9184LL/A Powerbook 12 Superdrive 1.33 Ghz Unknown
M9421LL/A Powerbook 15 Combo 1.42 Ghz $1,799
M9422LL/A Powerbook 15 Superdrive 1.42 Ghz $2,399
M9462LL/A Powerbook 17, 1.5 Ghz $2,499

That would put the new 17" Powerbook at $100 cheaper than the current 15" Superdrive...

See http://croquer.free.fr/

MM

You CAN'T just directly convert the price.

The prices in Europe are decided after a couple of more additions, and thats why, when you directly convert them to $, they are Always higher than US prices.

So,if you DIRECTLY converted, and there will be a price drop (I don't think so), the US prices will be CHEAPER than the prices you listed.

 

[Bolt]

I work at Best buy. My store carries Apple. My GM, who just got promoted to DM has told me we will be getting new 12inch powerbooks, that there is an announcement this monday. I'm going to miss him when he leaves, no more insider information

 

[eSnow]

I see a lot of Apple-apologies here...

If you really believe the 7447 and the 970FX are playing in the same league, you are just kidding yourself. For once, the G5 reaches higher clock-frequencies than the G4. If the coming PowerBooks reach 1.5Ghz with the 7447A, this might seem a lot. With the 970FX, 1.8ghz should be possible.

Next: the bandwidth. The 7447 might have problems to saturate a 8x AGP, let alone IDE and Gigabit Ethernet at the same time whereas the 970FX really has power to burn. If you ever have experienced a G4 side by side with a Pentium M, you know what I am talking about. The G4 is deeply in iBook-territory, because it has such a low throughput. Of course the current PowerBooks are fine for web browsing, light photoshop and stuff, but if you really throw data at them, they _are_ slow.

Next: Max RAM. I have owned a PB 5300, a Wallstreet/233 and a Ti/400. They started with 8, 32, and 128MB RAM and ended their useful life with 24, 160, and 512MB. The next G4-Powerbooks will come out with 512MB - 1GB, so it is not inconceivable that RAM-requirements would go beyond the 2GB limit imposed by the 32 bit arch.

So, don't tell me I don't need a G5. Sure, I could replace my Ti/400 with a 1.3 Ghz G4 and experience quite a boost. However, since I do not replace my machines every other year, and do stuff like Java where RAM-Bandwidth and cache are of importancce, I would likely regret it later.
After the completely lackluster books Apple introduced in Sept., I bought myself the cheapest Centrino I could get and have not yet regretted it. Speedwise, it is eating anything Apple has to offer for lunch. Yes, I want to have a capable PowerBook as a main machine, but I certainly am not buying into the tail end of evolving technology.

Unless the next G4 has a completely revised RAM-interface and the 'book a much better display, I am simply waiting.

If your needs are different - more power to you. But please stop the "A G4 is such a capable CPU it is good for almost everyone"-posts. They are completely pointless.

 

[7on]

Hi Everybody,

I am a TOTAL newbie. I am currently a PC user who cannot take Windows any more. I have decided to get an Apple PowerBook and "start my life fresh". I know that's a bit dramatic, but that's what it feels like. Windows 98 crashes EVERY DAY on me at work, and I can't handle having to deal with it at home too. I've reformatted so many times, and fixed so many glitches, bugs and problems, I could literally be tech support at a Fortune 500 company. And I want to get off Windows and onto a better system. I HEAR Apple is better, and I pray to God everybody is telling the truth and not just trying to "sell me".

So here's my situation: Should I wait and buy a G5 or should I get the new PowerBooks that are supposedly coming out next week? I'm getting anxious to "switch", but if you guys tell me that the difference is going to be huge, AND that the difference will matter to me, then I'll wait. Here's what I want to do on my mac: a bit of photo editing in Photoshop Elements or the Gimp (which I use on Windows and is actually pretty good for what I do); web surfing, email, typing essays on boring stuff, iTunes, and GarageBand (I'm an amateur guitar player). GarageBand and iTunes comes free with every Mac now, right? Every couple days, my dad wants me to check his stocks for him on a Java website, http://www.prophet.net/analyze/javacharts.jsp, so Java sites have to work well too. If my Mac works well for me, my dad said he would dump Windows ME and buy a Mac, too. Could somebody check that Java site for me? Apple has their own Java version, I hear it's good, but I don't know without trying it. Is it as slow as Windows' version?

I'd be buying a 15" PB with a Gig of RAM. Is the RAM soldered onto the Motherboard? I know some laptops come with a minimum amount soldered on. If I need more for GarageBand or if my dad's Java site is as slow as it is on Windows, I have a friend who works at a distributor-type place who says he can get me good quality Apple RAM cheaper than Apple. Should I get the minimum RAM from Apple and have my friend sell me the Gig RAM stick?

Currently at home I'm running a dual Pentium 400 with 256 RAM and Windows 2000. How will the PowerBook compare speedwise with this computer? I find my PC okay for speed with what I do, I'm hoping the PowerBook will be faster, but I really have no idea. I've looked all over, and I found a million Mac vs. Mac speed tests, but not many Mac vs. PC tests for the G4 PB. So I have no clue what I'm getting myself into.

I hope somebody reads this and has some good advice, because I originally thought it would be a good idea to wait for the second G5 PowerBook, but I don't think I can wait that long -- unless there's a good reason. So now I'm ready to crack and I'm totally confused. You guys know what I want to do with this machine: do I need more power? Are you satisfied with the OS performance? Am I missing anything?

Help!

As far as I know, Apple uses the standard Java system

Chillout, Buy a new Powerbook Tuesday (unless new ones come out Monday, then buy Monday). Most people who complain about the G4 are either current switchers, non-Mac users, or Mac users who always sell their current Macs and buy the newest ones. Regardless, I've found that people who use older machines seem to be more confident in what Apple offers. Could be that they are wiser in Apple's decisions. No matter what Mac you buy you can be assured it will last a good 4-5 years. My Mac (little over one year old) is still as fresh as when I bought it. My Powerbook seems to still rival most PC books out there. Not in rendering or compositing times, but in shear "getting things done" time. That's why it's hard to find PC vs. Mac performance tests. Because they don't figure in the ease of use. I made the switch without any research and I'm completely happy with my purchase.

 

[elo]

Sorry, elo, laying down blanket statements like this doesn't cut the mustard. Offer a reason why.

This is not to say that I definitely believe that there will be a G5 PB any time soon. Just that I find people saying things like this to be irritating, if nothing else.

Snowy, If I could offer more than I have, I would. It's immaterial to me whether you believe me or not. But I wouldn't suggest betting against my earlier statements on any major purchase decisions.

elo

 

[SuperChuck]

What's the bottom line on the front side bus issue?

I'm a wee-bit confused. If an increase in processor speed still yields an increase in performance, how has the sub-par front side bus hampered the processor? I assume that it is limiting it from reaching its full potential, but by how much? And if it is such a big deal, what has stopped Apple from increasing the front side bus speed? Is it a major technical hurdle? Is it Apple's problem or Motorola's?

Would the almighty tech wizards please inform us mere mortals of the scoop on this before we lay out big wads of cash?

Thanks.

 

[Windowlicker]

XP isn't any more secure from viruses, worms, etc. And it's not as reliable/crash-proof as many claim.

word. my girlfriend recently got a computer. her dad was getting it to her since she's a student with no much spare money (as you sure can imagine). well, i told her to say her ol' pap to get her a mac, even a used one. the answer was a strict no, because "you can't get any parts on macs".

now she has her PC, which was pretty much free of charge (got from her fathers work or something), but what the hell?! it keeps crashing when left alone for 2 minutes -- losing all her works. nice one. the same happenened to her friend who also has a pc (got a virus that deleted pretty much everything).

ok I know there are mostly PCs that work just fine (especially if you know how to use them), but I think this is a good example what happens when you get the cheap solution. I'm pretty sure i could have gotten her a mac running os9 and a display for like 100 euros, which I think is a good price for a computer you use for checking your mail, surfing the web, writing etc.


now.... I'M SURE THERE WILL BE A G5 POWERBOOK ON MONDAY, RUNNING @ 3GHZ (not, so stop wishing for it!)

 

[Snowy_River]

I generally agree with you, however one "non-high-end" app that does seem like a resource hog is GarageBand. I don't own it yet but I played around with it on a 1.25 GHz iMac at an Apple store and it brought that machine to its knees...very sluggish. Which is odd because I still do a lot of my work on an "old" 800 MHz TiBook, including Cinema4D, After Effects, Photoshop, and Cubase SX, and those all perform well. Some of GarageBand's problems are just the first-version blues I think. For example, it was using ~28% of the CPU when completely idle. It should get better with time.

Interesting. I have used GB a bit on my 867MHz 12"PB, and it doesn't seem all that sluggish. In fact, in general, it seems quite snappy. Don't know what was wrong with that iMac, but, as the saying goes, YMMV...

 

[wordmunger]

No that's incorrect. The prices in Euros are on the "Croquer la pomme" web site. The prices I gave above are a projection in US $ based on the full price drop in Euros between the old and the new prices that "Croquer la Pomm" published. If the same equivalent price drop %-wise is applied to the current US prices., this is what you get.

These prices are in US $.

MM

I think you're still wrong:

Ligne portable grand public
M9418LL/A iBook 14, Combo, 1.25 Ghz ...1169/1399
M9419LL/A iBook 14, Superdrive, 1.33Ghz
M9426LL/A iBook 12, 1 Ghz ...1002/1199

Ligne portable Pro
M9183LL/A Powerbook 12 Combo 1.33 Ghz
M9184LL/A Powerbook 12 Superdrive 1.33 Ghz
M9421LL/A Powerbook 15 Combo 1.42 Ghz ...1798/2151
M9422LL/A Powerbook 15 Superdrive 1.42 Ghz ...2298/2749
M9462LL/A Powerbook 17, 1.5 Ghz ...2499/2989

The site says "Ce sont les Tarifs HT en Europe/ toutes taxes en France," which translates to "these are the HT prices in Europe/all taxes in France". I take that to mean the first price is the price without tax for Europe, the second is the price with tax in France.

I'm not going to do all of these, but let's take the 12-inch ibook as an example. The first price is the european price, without French taxes: 1002 euros. That would compute out to $1199, pre-tax. After taxes, we have 1199 euros, or $1430 (which apple would probably round to $1399). Your conversion was $1099.

Actually, it looks like the easiest way to translate to american prices is just to look at the French price with tax, which corresponds quite well (coincidentally) to the US price in dollars.

 

[James_C]

Hi Everybody,

So here's my situation: Should I wait and buy a G5 or should I get the new PowerBooks that are supposedly coming out next week? I'm getting anxious to "switch", but if you guys tell me that the difference is going to be huge, AND that the difference will matter to me, then I'll wait. Here's what I want to do on my mac: a bit of photo editing in Photoshop Elements or the Gimp (which I use on Windows and is actually pretty good for what I do); web surfing, email, typing essays on boring stuff, iTunes, and GarageBand (I'm an amateur guitar player). GarageBand and iTunes comes free with every Mac now, right? Every couple days, my dad wants me to check his stocks for him on a Java website, http://www.prophet.net/analyze/javacharts.jsp, so Java sites have to work well too. If my Mac works well for me, my dad said he would dump Windows ME and buy a Mac, too. Could somebody check that Java site for me? Apple has their own Java version, I hear it's good, but I don't know without trying it. Is it as slow as Windows' version?

I'd be buying a 15" PB with a Gig of RAM.

Currently at home I'm running a dual Pentium 400 with 256 RAM and Windows 2000. How will the PowerBook compare speedwise with this computer?
Help!

Chillout, I have the current 1.25 GHz 15" Powerbook, and it can do with ease all the items on your wish list. I would have no hesitation in suggesting you switch next week, when the speedbumped Powerbooks come out ( In fact you may want to pick up a bargain on the current range of Powerbooks). I really think you will be waiting until October for the G5 Powerbooks. The G4 processors are more efficient that the Intel processors, and lets say Apple bring out a 1.4 GHz Powerbook next week, this will have the approximate performance of a 2GHz Intel chip. It will be much faster than you current setup.

 

[pigwin32]

Completely true! I have aDell with 15" screen and 1600x1400, and it's terrible. Unreadably small at that resolution and way too blurry to be acceptable in any lower res! I actually hope Apple doesn't change screen res in the new PBs .

I think you may be missing the point, a higher res screen doesn't have to mean miniature fonts. Better screen resolution is great for image/video editing/viewing. There's no reason why this shouldn't be available on a machine targeted at the visual arts. Scale the font/icon size up to a readable size. This is also possible to some extent on a PC.

 

[john123]

I cant see too many Apple fans buying a new powerbook with a G4 in it.

Only a G5 will persuade me to buy a new powerbook.

Ditto here. I owned a Pismo, a PB 550, a 667, and now a 1Ghz (Ti)...and I just can't justify the expense to get what is really a marginal performance increase for the current (and likely next) G4 models.

 

[QCassidy352]

Sure, many just repeat the mantra they hear on this forum and elsewhere but (while not in the market for a PB, I want an iMac) I have what I believe are sound reasons for wanting a G5 even though a G4 can do what I need it to do.

They are the future and I expect my next Mac to last 5 years unless I decide to upgrade for other reasons. Apple will in the next couple/few years release a 64 bit OS, I'd like to be able to run it without having to go out and buy a new Mac. At this point, I'd bet the next version of OS X will be the last to support G3s (and I own 2 of them). The one after that will probably be the last for the G4s. At one update per year, a G4 makes no sense for me.

If I'm spending a couple/few thousand bucks on a new computer, it should be state of the art technology. The G4 is simply not that. Don't kid yourself, if Apple could drop that puppy tomorrow for all G5s, they'd do it in a heartbeat. Would simplify their marketing and manufacturing to name but 2 advantages. Alas, that is not the Apple way. They have to cripple models to protect others and play marketing games rather than let the market decide. I say, put faster processors in all models and diffrentiate them with other features. The , let's cripple the iMac so we can force people to buy PMs doesn't work. Heaven forbid the "pro" users get upset because a "consumer" model is close in performance.


Jobs got up on stage last year and told the world that the G5 was the best; why should he offer me anything less, especially at the prices Apple charges?

Ok, *if* Tiger is the last to support the G3 and the next one is the last to support the G4, that means that it's fall 2006 when an OS comes out that doesn't support a G4. But that's a huge if. We almost certainly aren't going to see G5 powerbooks until 2005. Which means 2006 is the earliest ibooks are going to see a G5. So it's quite likely that at some point during 2006, ibook G4s are still going to be around. There's no way apple would release an OS that won't run on hardware sold earlier that same year.

Besides, Apple is still releasing operating systems that can run (not that well, but still) on 6 year old hardware (beige G3s). But you think that in 2006 they will release an OS that won't even run on 2 year old hardware? I think you're mistaken.

You're also at least partially wrong about why there are not G5s across the line. Yes Apple wants to differentiate between models, but have you seen the news coming out of IBM's Fishkill plant? It's not good. IBM is not producing nearly enough G5 chips to meet demand, and Apple is the only customer. Apple *may* be unwilling to have an all-G5 line up, but they are certainly *unable* to do so... so who cares what they *would* do if they could?

One other thing. For all the people saying that the G5 performance edge is not just about the chip, but the bandwidth and bus and such - but that's all already taken in to account in benchmarks. You can b**** and moan about how the G4 has no bandwidth, but these are benchmarks for the system as a whole. When you compare G4s and G5s clock for clock in the real world, everything about the architecture of the G5 is already part of that. The G5 is only showing an advantage of ~25% over the G4 beyond what we would expect due to clockspeed alone. Say what you want about the advantages of the G5's bandwidth, but that advantage is still only 25%. And yes the G5 *can* hit higher clockspeeds than the G4, but if they released a G5 powerbook with a 1.5 Ghz chip on Monday, everyone would be thrilled. The chip has great potential, but the real world options at this point would be something like a 1.5 Ghz G4 and a 1.5 Ghz G5.

 

[Iron Man]

Powerbook updates gaming performance

These new Powerbooks better run UT2004 and Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne perfectly at the best settings... think they will?

 

[HiRez]

I think you may be missing the point, a higher res screen doesn't have to mean miniature fonts. Better screen resolution is great for image/video editing/viewing. There's no reason why this shouldn't be available on a machine targeted at the visual arts. Scale the font/icon size up to a readable size. This is also possible to some extent on a PC.

That's right, the idea is to keep the font height you see the same (IOW, the same size in relation to you, not the actual "point size"), but with more pixels to work with, you'll get smoother antialiasing on those fonts. More resolution, while not the only factor, is better if you use it correctly, as you point out.

The other thing I've noticed, and particularly on the PC side, is that very few people have their LCDs color-calibrated. This makes a huge difference in quality. The new Apple Display Calibrator offers some nice advanced controls for this, and the Supercal app is also good. I notice a lot of PC LCDs that have uncorrected gamma curves and the brightness all the way up, so you get the "blooming" effect where light pours out around small dark areas (like text) and spills over, greatly reducing legibility. Also most people keep the white point at ~9000K (unfortunately, usually the default), which is blueish. For good quality, it should be paper-white, which is usually more like ~5000-6500K.

 

[HiRez]

These new Powerbooks better run UT2004 and Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne perfectly at the best settings... think they will?

Perfectly? No. Although I have to say Warcraft III runs pretty well even on my 800 MHz PowerBook (Radeon 7500) at 1280x854. And for some games, a G4 'Book will never get it done. Halo, for example, can cripple even a dual 2.0 GHz G5 with Radeon 9800 when you crank up the settings.

 

[iAtom]

These new Powerbooks better run UT2004 and Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne perfectly at the best settings... think they will?

I doubt they will at the highest settings, but i'm sure they will run them very well (they more than meet all the requirements).

 

[Hattig]

WTF do they mean by integrated graphics? Does that mean it has a monitor attached?!? Is it even possible to have a laptop to NOT have integrated graphics? So that's like saying, "Buy our laptop because it features a screen, keyboard, trackpad, power button, battery, and 2 whole mouse buttons!"

Integrated graphics means that the chipset includes a graphics core, and that main system memory is used for the graphics display. These graphics cores are not very good typically (they've got to run cool for the laptop, and as they share the die with the northbridge they have less functionality)

i.e., Integrated graphics will take away system memory amd perform worse

On an iMac / PowerMac, the graphics are discrete, and have their own memory. Hence the graphics perform better and you don't lose main memory to graphics.

 

[Spazmodius]

750vx??

Y'know what I'd like? A PB or iB with IBM's updated G-variant, the 750vx.

Remember that? It supposed to be shipping in quantity "end of 3rd quarter". Well, this is the end of Apple's fiscal 3rd quarter is it not?

The 750vx was supposed to be hitting the ground running at abot 1.6 to 2.2 GHz, have a vector unit equivalent to the G5, plus a 400MHz FSB. In other words, it's a G3 with Altivec equivalent, an FSB 2.4x faster than what the G4 will ever have, clocked to begin with at a speed faster than the G4 has ever attained.

What the hell happened to it? We've heard nothing about this chip in aeons, it's seemed like. Forget the G5; I don't need to search terabyte databases on a notebook, fercryinoutloud. I just need a fast, modern 32-bit chip that cosumes low power and can run Panther. The fabled 750vx fits all of these criteria to a giant capitol T.

C'mon Apple! Throw us a better bone here, will ya? And IBM, where is this new portable chip??? What's going on!

Just imagine: iBook, 1.6GHz 750vx, 1 gig ram, $1400 tops...mmmmm

 

[Iroganai]

LCD resolution for new models

I hope the new iBook has 1280x1024 or something...
Does anyone know for sure?

 

[Hattig]

Hate to be off topic here, but.. Apple will most likly never have a 64-bit complied OS. Why, because 64-bit instruction is twice as large. Its a big waste.

Instruction size is not altered by being 64-bit.

64-bitness denotes the size of an integer register within a CPU, and how much memory can be accessed. That still doesn't stop you using 32-bit integers where you don't need 64-bit ones.

So the worst thing that will happen with 64-bit is that the size of data will increase in applications where 64-bit integers are useful, and hence processor cache will be used up a little bit more.