If around 1/3 of people are waiting for a new PowerBook, then that must have a huge impact on revenue. If a typical update cycle is 6 months, then they've effectively thrown out one iteration of the cycle. What I'm wondering is, how have they explained this to shareholders? "Yeah, we couldn't make a cool enough computer, so we just decided that we didn't need people's money" ?
Seriously, as if they couldn't have thrown a 1.25 GHz chip into a notebook, and either just made the case thicker, or marketted it as a luggable, not a laptop. A lot of people use notebook computers because they need something portable, not because they actually want it resting on their lap. PC companies capitalize on this by putting the faster desktop (not mobile) chip they can into a thick notebook, which has a 1 hour battery life. Why is that acceptable? Because they're only used on a desk, plugged in.
That's why not have a G5 notebook is idiotic. No matter how bad the cooling situation is, they could easily throw a 1.0, 1.4, or maybe even a 1.6 into a thicker case, and it would sell. Not doing so is a slap in the face of the shareholders, and the users.
