Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I think we're gonna see...

I think we're going to see a new airport card with 802.11g, bluetooth, AND gps with some soft/hardware from Wheels Of Zeus . I think we could see location based integration with networking and amazing new sherlock plugins.

This might not seem likely at first, but it is a very apple type move, - new expensive card, many reasons to buy; you want one feature, why not get em all - and we're due something new, innovative, and cool. If not the fifth then MWSF. You heard it hear first.

or maybe someone else said the same thing but i didn't know.
 
Originally posted by madamimadam


I have two points in reply:

1stly, there are new batteries coming out soon but I would doubt that they will be on the next PowerBooks; and
2ndly, just because the processor uses 50% more power does not mean the machine does. The processor is a VERY small portion of the total power used by the machine. The processor in your PowerBook takes about ask much power as the average light bulb and sometimes even less so it really is not creating a great strain on the battery.

You make a valid point. However, I suspect (but don't know for certain) that the LCD backlight and the G4 consume more power than any other components. In fact, they're probably about equal in energy use and together they may account for 40 to 50 percent of the power consumption. Add to this that the fan will likely be running more often with the faster processor (getting rid of the heat takes more energy) and that the cache and system clock will also be running faster. Therefore, taken all together I wouldn't characterize this as a "VERY small portion of the total power." Certainly not 50% more, but a very noticeable change.

In any case, we should know in another week if a 1 GHz PowerBook is practical (without compromises or a new design).
 
Originally posted by fpnc


You make a valid point. However, I suspect (but don't know for certain) that the LCD backlight and the G4 consume more power than any other components. In fact, they're probably about equal in energy use and together they may account for 40 to 50 percent of the power consumption. Add to this that the fan will likely be running more often with the faster processor (getting rid of the heat takes more energy) and that the cache and system clock will also be running faster. Therefore, taken all together I wouldn't characterize this as a "VERY small portion of the total power." Certainly not 50% more, but a very noticeable change.

In any case, we should know in another week if a 1 GHz PowerBook is practical (without compromises or a new design).

I like your point about the fan... I did not think of that... I know there are a couple of people around that know almost exactly where all the power is used but since I do not know any names I can just hope someone read this and gives us a hand.
:)

I was, however, shocked when you said you get 2hr out of your 800. I am going to buy a PowerBook when they come out next and I expect them to be 800MHz. I did not really think I was going to get the 5hr Apple claims but I did expect to get a lot more than 2.
 
Heat - Power

Ha,

It sound like everyone here thinks that Apple should fire there engineers that
are involved with the Powerbook, LoL Is there a big heat different from the
667 to the 800 Powerbook? Do the math.

Airport, It should (better have it)
Blue tooth, that would be cool (let hope for it)
Better Battier, should be no problem now a days....
Superdrive, Forums say yes Apple says No (it would be cool if it had it)

But again everybody is throwing there opinions and what they think,
that the G4 1Ghz eat allot of power an make to much heat, hmmmm
if that is the case then the smart move would be not to put in a Superdrive
cause DAM that would eat allot and be to hat HuH?

My opinion is that Apple should work more on External DVD-R support
there Laptops. Also I think the real Q is will they be available on the 5th
and for how much. Same Price more in it? Or more likely a RIP off
add more to the price and a little to the product.

G4 1Ghz hey I'll get one.... you?


Shaggy
 
Re: Heat - Power

Originally posted by Shaggy_Alien

But again everybody is throwing there opinions and what they think,
that the G4 1Ghz eat allot of power an make to much heat, hmmmm
if that is the case then the smart move would be not to put in a Superdrive
cause DAM that would eat allot and be to hat HuH?

IMO, Superdrives should not even be thought about until new batteries come out. As for heat... god only knows what they're gonna do there.
 
Re: Level 3 cache?

Originally posted by vixapphire
Just out of curiosity, for all you mega computer/engineer types, assuming Apple changed nothing else in the current 800M G4 Tibook, but added another meg of L3 cache (making it 2 instead of 1), what percentage speed improvement would you expect the computer to have?

Well, amount of cache is a tricky effect to quantify. More cache allows you to keep larger "working set" applications "in cache" instead of constantly swapping cache and main memory. So, really, you'd have to have a good memory profile of a specific application to determine this.

On the "high" end (ie, a single program that uses exactly 2MB of working set in random rotation) L3 is, if I remember correctly from WWDC, a 10x improvement from main memory, and so you'd see half of your memory access going ten times as fast. Which would mean, assuming your app is memory constrained, you would go from 1x+10x (11x) to 1x+1x (2x), or a little better than a 5x improvement.

However, you've got some big caveats built in: your app is memory constrained, even in L3; you have true random memory access so that all bits of that 2MB are accessed equally often; not much else is running on your computer to take up the L3 cache so you don't have to swap cache in/out when your app is/does preempt. It's extremely rare for all of these to qualify, and I'd be very surprised if a cache increase would give a real-world machine more than a 1-2% performance improvement (I would be surprised because Apple engineers are smart enough to have run the numbers on this already and they should have optimized the cache regarding performance/cost).
 
Originally posted by fpnc
madamimadam said, "I really do not think that power of the G4 chip is a problem. While the power difference might be a lot comparitley speaking, it is really not that much power."

Well, without a significantly more powerful battery a 1 GHz TiBook would have pretty poor runtime. I have the 800 MHz unit and the batteries (I have two) generally run for only about two hours, so with a similar battery I guess you'd be lucky to get 90 minutes on a 1 GHz machine.

That's the point you are missing: the CPU doesn't take up anywhere near 100% of the power requirements on a TiBook. On an Intel laptop, the processor is about 50% of the battery drain, so a 50% increase in CPU power-drain would cause a 25% increase in battery drain (which would be a 20% reduction in battery life). On a TiBook, as far as I can tell, the CPU is at most about 25% of the load, so a 50% increase would be about a 12.5% increase in battery drain, which is an 11% battery life decrease. So, if the current TiBook lasts 120 minutes on a particular battery, the "new" TiBook would last 107 minutes.

On the other hand, the impact of a higher battery drain would be minimal if you are actually using that speed of processor, because whatever you are doing would hopefully take less time to do (and if you aren't using that speed processor, buy the cheaper model!). If the machine performance averages out to ~11% better (which it wouldn't be likely to do, as most apps will be IO bound instead of CPU bound in this case), and you're actually using your CPU the whole time it is on instead of it sitting idle, then you've got the same amount of work being done on a single battery cycle, but being done faster.

I know, cold comfort when you just want the machine to stay alive long enough to play a DVD on a cross-country flight, but ... well, until more intelligent CPU and bus speed control goes in, no PC is going to shine in the long-life/low-power environment.
 
Originally posted by jettredmont


That's the point you are missing: the CPU doesn't take up anywhere near 100% of the power requirements on a TiBook. On an Intel laptop, the processor is about 50% of the battery drain, so a 50% increase in CPU power-drain would cause a 25% increase in battery drain (which would be a 20% reduction in battery life). On a TiBook, as far as I can tell, the CPU is at most about 25% of the load, so a 50% increase would be about a 12.5% increase in battery drain, which is an 11% battery life decrease. So, if the current TiBook lasts 120 minutes on a particular battery, the "new" TiBook would last 107 minutes.

On the other hand, the impact of a higher battery drain would be minimal if you are actually using that speed of processor, because whatever you are doing would hopefully take less time to do (and if you aren't using that speed processor, buy the cheaper model!). If the machine performance averages out to ~11% better (which it wouldn't be likely to do, as most apps will be IO bound instead of CPU bound in this case), and you're actually using your CPU the whole time it is on instead of it sitting idle, then you've got the same amount of work being done on a single battery cycle, but being done faster.

I know, cold comfort when you just want the machine to stay alive long enough to play a DVD on a cross-country flight, but ... well, until more intelligent CPU and bus speed control goes in, no PC is going to shine in the long-life/low-power environment.

fpnc did make a goode point, though, that the faster processor would have greater heat and need the fan more often which = more battery.
 
Powerbook Enclosure Change

If Apple wants to keep the titanium body they are going to need to move at least the back panel of the case to a microperforated titanium. Very small holes throughout the metal along with tiny raised bumps in between the holes. When the case is placed on a surface it remains slightly raised with lots of tiny air pockets to dissapate heat, plus the texture this would create on the metal would be bad-ass.

As long as the case itself acts as the radiator for the built-up heat, they will have to find some solution to heat dissapation before the 1Ghz is introduced. Allow the air to move, convection will cool much better than radiation and conduction (Usually to your scalded lap). Hoping for a new enclosure...
 
Re: Powerbook Enclosure Change

Originally posted by dabirdwell
If Apple wants to keep the titanium body they are going to need to move at least the back panel of the case to a microperforated titanium. Very small holes throughout the metal along with tiny raised bumps in between the holes. When the case is placed on a surface it remains slightly raised with lots of tiny air pockets to dissapate heat, plus the texture this would create on the metal would be bad-ass.

As long as the case itself acts as the radiator for the built-up heat, they will have to find some solution to heat dissapation before the 1Ghz is introduced. Allow the air to move, convection will cool much better than radiation and conduction (Usually to your scalded lap). Hoping for a new enclosure...

I am not too sure convection heating is really possible with a laptop.
 
Originally posted by dethl
I wonder if Apple is killing the ability to boot into OS 9 in these laptops?

i hope not.

will be interesting to see whether the company delights or disappoints its core user/fan base tomorrow or wednesday.
 
Re: Re: Powerbook Enclosure Change

Originally posted by madamimadam


I am not too sure convection heating is really possible with a laptop.

"Convection" is the process of transfering heat energy via moving matter (ie, air or another fluid normally). Fans cool by convection (moving the heated air away from the heat source). This is in contrast to "conduction", which is the movement of energy through a mass, and "radiation", which is the movement of energy via sub-atomic particles/radiation (depending on your POV on what radiation is, wave or particle, at the particular time).

Traditional cooling mechanisms use conduction to take the heat from an inconvenient source (such as a CPU) to a more convenient/larger surface area object (such as a heat sink), and then convection to disperse the heat into the general atmosphere.

Adding a fan of any sort to the notebook would allow convection to take place. That, of course, is one of the first things notebook manufacturers look at to cool their systems (although noise generated is roughly proportionate to air flow and no one wants a notebook louder than the jet engine outside your airplane window).

While "convection" is also used to describe a process where the heated air moved of its own accord (ie, "up", replaced by downward-flowing cooling air), this is really more properly refered to as "self-convecting". And, no, I don't think a laptop has enough vertical open space to allow for a large degree of air self-convection. And, of course, that would make your keyboard and palm rest the heat sinks, and I don't think Joe Consumer would appreciate hot air convecting up between his fingertips as he types ...

"Heat tubes" rely on self-convection of a fluid (picked for its thermal properties; not often air) within a tube, and are driven by one end of the tube being appreciably higher up than the other end of the tube. Some PC manufacturers (Shuttle comes to mind) have had great success in cooling small-form-factor PCs using heat tubes, along with a more traditional heat-transfer mechanism at the "output" end (heat sink+fan). However, the only possible way I can see this working in a laptop situation is if the heat tube went from the innards of the machine (CPU, GPU, etc) to the "top" of the open laptop screen, allowing the entire back side of the laptop case to essentially act as a heat sink ... but then, of course, the heat tube would have to bend at the screen/body joint, which is a tricky situation (this isn't just wires, but a tubing that has to remain 100% structurally sound through years of abuse and fairly dramatic heating/cooling cycles, and provide the cross-sectional area and lack of surface friction required to allow self-convection to take place ... a very tricky materials problem indeed!). Plus, what happens when you "close" the notebook (perhaps to put it in a dock, perhaps to have it continue to play MP3s through your headphones while you catch a quick snooze on the plane), thus removing the vertical differential required for the cooling mechanism? Or, what happens if you don't operate the laptop with the degiend 90 degrees between lid and base? Any catastrophic structural failure of the heating system would destroy your system via overheating within seconds, but also any "slow leak" failure would stand a high chance of causing a short and likewise destroying your system.

So, no, I don't see self-convection, even in the relatively versatile heat tube, as a really near-term possibility on a laptop. But it would be really cool if Apple could do it anyways :) ...
 
Re: Re: Re: Powerbook Enclosure Change

Originally posted by jettredmont

Traditional cooling mechanisms use conduction to take the heat from an inconvenient source (such as a CPU) to a more convenient/larger surface area object (such as a heat sink), and then convection to disperse the heat into the general atmosphere.

My apologies to my college mass/heat transfer prof for incorrectly using "heat" and "energy" interchangably throughout the previous post ... :)
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Powerbook Enclosure Change

Originally posted by jettredmont


My apologies to my college mass/heat transfer prof for incorrectly using "heat" and "energy" interchangably throughout the previous post ... :)


Dude, you could have saved yourself the problem by just pointing out that fan cooling is also convection cooling instead of giving us a science lesson.
:)


Definition One:

Convection is the transport of energy due to density differences when not in a free-fall (microgravity) environment. As a liquid or gas is heated it expands and becomes less dense and therefore lighter. If a cooler denser material is above the hotter layer the warmer material will rise through the cooler material to the surface. The rising material will dissipate its heat (energy) into the surrounding environment, become more dense (cooler), and will sink to start the process over.


Definition Two:

Heat transfer in a gas or liquid by the circulation of currents from one region to another.


Therefore it is convection cooling because there is a current caused by the fan from one region to another.
 
Convection

My point was that obviously the fan is already trying to cool by convection but in the solid enclosure the air can't move much at all. I think Ti users would prefer a warm breeze coming from the bottom of the machine than the hotplate it can be now. Originally I suggested only the bottom panel breathe.

The radiant heat dissipation I refer to is that that occurs from the titanium itself into the air, and the conductive heat dissipation I refer to is that from the titanium directly to whatever surface the computer is sitting on. As I understand it, the heat sinks are connected to the casing, allowing it to act as a (very hot) radiator.
 
Re: Re: Level 3 cache?

Originally posted by jettredmont
Well, amount of cache is a tricky effect to quantify. More cache allows you to keep larger "working set" applications "in cache" instead of constantly swapping cache and main memory. So, really, you'd have to have a good memory profile of a specific application to determine this.

On the "high" end (ie, a single program that uses exactly 2MB of working set in random rotation) L3 is, if I remember correctly from WWDC, a 10x improvement from main memory, and so you'd see half of your memory access going ten times as fast. Which would mean, assuming your app is memory constrained, you would go from 1x+10x (11x) to 1x+1x (2x), or a little better than a 5x improvement.
Unfortunately, the only reason they need the L3 is because the memory bandwidth blows. Once you've got the main memory bus VERY fast, L3 isn't needed (PowerPC 970, Athlon, Pentium 4, etc.).
 
actually, i think that L3 still helps you--even with DDR. it's hardwired onto the chip and only used by it, so it's much more efficient for the processor to use. granted, it makes a huge difference on G4s because their main mem bandwidth does blow, but it'd still be helpful. i might be wrong, but i think the 970 has L3 as well.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.