PowerBook to gain iSight, iBook to go widescreen in 2006

[Hattig]

The Pentium is even faster than the AMD Opteron chips (clock for clock). That means that when we run PPC apps on one of the new Intel PowerBooks, they shouldn't run that much slower than on the current PPC Powerbooks.

Pentium M has good gaming performance because of its good integer performance. In everything else the Athlon 64 beats it. Anyway, I'm sure I saw a review where a 2GHz Turion (25W Athlon 64) beat a 2GHz Dothan (27W) in gaming performance given the same mobile graphics chip.

Anyway, the Pentium M tops out at 2.26GHz, and the Athlon 64 goes up to 2.8GHz, or 2.4GHz dual-core. So the argument is moot. When Intel releases desktop variants of this chip that run at equivalent speeds we can come back to the discussion.

 

[Mitch1984]

Um, 20-30% thinner? I'm sorry, but the Powerbooks are thin enough as it is. Making a peice of hardware thinner requires engineers to cut corners, and that's not good for the consumer.

No it doesn't they didn't cut any corners making the nano small!

 

[rockthecasbah]

No it doesn't they didn't cut any corners making the nano small!

true, and look at the iMac!! Those machines are amazing, and look at all the high performance stuff you can upgrade them to, as well as the svelte casing!

 

[Mitch1984]

As for the thinner design, it sounds like form has taken over function at Apple. The 5G iPod was also made thinner and that resulted in loss of FireWire. What will go in the next PowerBooks? The back-lit keyboards maybe?

Yeah but that's because Apple are trying to encourage people to use USB 2.0. I haven't got USb 2.0 but I guess it's time to upgrade soon anyway.

Isn't USB 2.0 faster than firewire now?

Apple were quick to get rid off floppy/zip drives because they realised alot of people were on the internet nowadays.

Now they will get rid of modems in the entire mac range because most people are using broadband, and if they aren't they should be.
I'm not bothered with that it'll give people a reason to leave dial up behind.

In 3 years maybe they everything will be wireless thus creating more space.

The optical media drive is here to stay, because blue ray is round the corner and digital distribution isn't everywhere yet.

 

[themacman]

GRRRRRR and i just bought a new powerbook too!!!! Oh well, ill wiati for the merom powerbooks anyways

same. i just bought a 15'' powerbook, maybe they will do a rev e for rev a program.

 

[pionata]

So the PowerBooks look set for MacWorld hey,

uumm, let me think

That would explain the crappy last update.
I reckon announce at MWSF to be shipped by end of Jan early Feb

13" 15" 17"

13" 2.26GHZ 1GBDDR2 80GB Superdrive 128mb X600
15" 2.4GHZ 1GBDDR2 100GB Superdrive 128mb x600 w/256 option
17" 2.4GHZ 1GBDDR2 120GB Superdrive 256mb

-All w/ iSight option
-All w/ 6GB flash drive for Mac OSX and fast booting
-Same price points
-All in Al finish with option of Black
-All armed and equipped to make 2006 the new 1984

ALSO NEW WIRELESS RELEASED

In March we will see a special event - new iBooks and Mac mini's

12" and 14" NON WIDESCREEEN

12" 1.73GHZ 512mb DDR2 40GB Superdrive 64mb 6200
14" 1.86GHZ 512mb DDR2 80GB Superdrive 64mb 6200

-All with iSight as an option
-Same price points
-In white or Black

Mac mini

1.73GHZ 512mb DDR2 40GB Combo 64mb 6200 $449
1.86GHZ 512mb DDR2 80GB Superdrive 64mb 6200 $599
1.86GHZ 512mb DDR2 160GB Superdrive TV Tuner 64mb 6600 $799

The WWDC will arrive:
Nothing major hardware side
- the world will be engulfed in PowerBook fever
maybe slight updates -
new Final Cut
Adobe will release new Series made for intel

Paris Expo

-Intel iMac's

Hey i can dream

Well, judging by the fact my ibook 800mhz is around the same speed as a pentium 1.6ghz (That has also twice more ram), I would prefer to stick to a G4 then. lol

But maybe the magic is os X and not the PPC processor.

Honestly, with the price of the powerbooks, I would see nothing less than a 3ghz in those.

 

[300ZX]

Originally Posted by Cinch
We can also elimnate firewire ports and just have two or three USB2 ports. That is it; just three USB2 and a video out port. That is all we need.

So how are we going to get our mini DV camcorders to import our videos into iMovie or anything else? Last I checked (30 seconds ago) camcorders only work (in OS X) when plugged in via firewire.

Seriously though, why do you need such a small computer? A guy I work with has some VAIO that is seriously like 10 inch widescreen; it looks like a widescreen calculator. It weighs nothing, but I do not see how you could use one of those regularly; it is just TOO SMALL. At the same time though, it does not lack on features one bit.

I see a LOT of the 12 inch ibooks on campus (probably becuase of the free ipod mini deal), and I don't think they really need to be any smaller than that. I find them to be too small the way it is, but to each his own. The 12" Powerbook probably sells well because it's the CHEAPEST of the Powerbook line...

The 14-15 inch models weigh like 5 pounds or less and are comparable in size to a notebook (pad of paper); how much thinner / lighter / do they really NEED to be? I for one would rather have a one pound heavier or 1/4 - 1/2 inch thicker notebook with more features and more power than to neuter it by making it any smaller than the current 12's.

Five to seven pounds is very light; if that is not "portable" enough, perhaps some strength training is in order...

 

[Stella]

Apple removed for two reason:
1. Reduce the size of the iPod nano
2. Reduce the cost. Apparently FW controllers are more expensive than USB

Firewire 400 is still faster than USB 2.

Found benchmarks ( for Macs, at least )-
Firewire v USB
http://www.barefeats.com/usb2.html

Yeah but that's because Apple are trying to encourage people to use USB 2.0. I haven't got USb 2.0 but I guess it's time to upgrade soon anyway.

Isn't USB 2.0 faster than firewire now?

 

[iAFC]

So can we expect those new iBooks for Macworld SF 2006? After checking the MacRumors' Buyer's Guide, I realized that it's very probable that we will see iBook updates in January.

 

[giveup]

I have positive feeling on Apple for making better laptop.

 

[AidenShaw]

The G5's FSB is over-hyped....

One very important thing that contributes to the overall speed of a computer is the Front Side Bus - Something Apple has done well with, 1.25 GHz!

Note that the FSB on the G5 is bi-directional 32-bits, so it needs twice the MHz of the 64-bit Intel bus to read data at the same rate....

So, the 633MHz iMac bus can read at the same rate as a 317MHz 64-bit bus.

Beware of the MHz Myth for the FSB - again, the bus speed is only one of many factors in the overall equation.

 

[wide]

how would you get an isight into the powerbook display?

same way you get a camera into a RAZR phone

 

[~Shard~]

I'm a little late to this bit of news, but very nice, I must say! As for seeing Intel PowerBooks so early, this makes sense for a couple of reasons:

- the latest PowerBooks updates, although nice, were nothing groundbreaking (i.e.e 7448 chips, etc.)
- if Apple is going to eventually go with Merom, then it makes sense to put out a new machine sooner rather than later, so a) it can be in the market for a decent amount of time and b) we have something to tide us over until the Merom machines are ready

As for the built-in iSight, that would be very cool!

I'll definitely be following these rumors closely... 2006 has the potential to be an amazing year for Apple...

 

[Hattig]

Yeah but that's because Apple are trying to encourage people to use USB 2.0. I haven't got USb 2.0 but I guess it's time to upgrade soon anyway.

Isn't USB 2.0 faster than firewire now?

Only on paper, and only if you are comparing it against Ye Olde Firewire 400. However USB2 in reality does not even match Firewire 400, although it isn't bad. It also has higher CPU requirements.

Apple were quick to get rid off floppy/zip drives because they realised alot of people were on the internet nowadays.

Now they will get rid of modems in the entire mac range because most people are using broadband, and if they aren't they should be.
I'm not bothered with that it'll give people a reason to leave dial up behind.

There's lots of people in the world that don't have access to broadband yet, and won't for quite some time. Sure, drop the modem on the home systems, but don't drop it on the mobile systems, you never know when you want to get online and the only option is via a modem.

The floppy was rightly dropped because it was irrelevant. Woo, 1.44MB!

In 3 years maybe they everything will be wireless thus creating more space.

The optical media drive is here to stay, because blue ray is round the corner and digital distribution isn't everywhere yet.

Indeed, the optical drive won't go away for a very long time.

 

[StarbucksSam]

My Visa card just leapt out of my wallet like a spawning salmon.

That was so funny I had to post to tell you how funny it was.

Anyway, the 13" iBook sounds cool, but honestly, I'm happy with what I have now and intend to keep it for another 2 and a half years.

 

[VanMac]

Would like some spy shots of these new PBs.

I would be a guinea pig and go for the rev-a. Worth the buzz.

 

[Darwin]

I look forward to seeing a design refresh, also if they are going to make the laptops thinner that will be interesting to see

 

[~Shard~]

I look forward to seeing a design refresh, also if they are going to make the laptops thinner that will be interesting to see

Yeah, precisely, they don't exactly have a lot of fat that could be trimmed.

 

[maya]

Sounds great and all, however that iSight in the screen needs to be movable. Maybe some sort of auto-movement detection.

 

[Hattig]

Note that the FSB on the G5 is bi-directional 32-bits, so it needs twice the MHz of the 64-bit Intel bus to read data at the same rate....

So, the 633MHz iMac bus can read at the same rate as a 317MHz 64-bit bus.

Beware of the MHz Myth for the FSB - again, the bus speed is only one of many factors in the overall equation.

But it is bi-directional, so on a 1.25GHz bus your can read and write 5GB/s at the same time.

The 64-bit Pentium bus runs at 100MHz quad-pumped (for the 400MHz Dothan), 133MHz (for the 533MHz Dothan) and 167MHz (for upcoming 667MHz bus Yonahs, Meroms). One issue with quad pumped vs. double pumped is that it is less efficient. Ignoring that, a Yonah next year on a 667MT/s bus will have a total of 5.3GB/s to AND from the chipset.

 

[dan_]

I don't know, all reports I've seen have pointed towards Apple. (Especially the ones reported by Apple)
And I was comparing Macs out right now, to PC's out right now. Not Intel Macs vs Current Macs.

But hopefully you are right about seeing even faster computers coming.

We're talking about the G4, not the G5.

 

[bloosqr]

??? really that's seems a little odd to me as it stands right now a 3yr old PC would be in the Semptron 3000 (2.ghz) range and my sister has one of these systems with the same amount of RAM as my 1ghz powerbook 768MB And my Powerbook may not boot as fast (but even the Dual 2.7 doesn't boot as fast as most windows machines) but lets try encoding MPEG-4 with quicktime or ripping a CD to MP3 or doing something in photoshop.... and in all cases the powerbook is either just as good or beats the pants off the PC (in this case CD ripping is twice as fast on the powerbook).

I really doubt this. I have a power g4 running at 1.33 ghz and it is about as fast as the p3/800 laptop that it replaced (from about 4 years ago). I also have a g5 which is an incredible fast machine. If you have a chance
actually try this benchmark, use the lame encoder to encode the same mp3 file on both of your systems, and post the timing tests that you get. The only thing that I can thing of that may make this true is the sempron was one of those "budget" chips made to compete w/ the celeron and has only 256 kb of l2 cache. But still the FSB was 333 mhz which is basically still twice as fast the the G4.

Incidentally doing mpeg-4 encoding is insanely slow (hours for a two hour movie) on a g5, how long does it take to do on the g4?

 

[ebunton]

"new eye-catching industrial designs"

Wow, who would've thought?

 

[macrumors12345]

I think very FEW people would like 1920x1080+ on a 13" screen, if they actually sat down and tried to use such a thing. Talk about fine print!

Dude, 720p is considered HDTV, and that is a resolution of 1280x720, which would be perfectly acceptable on a 13" widescreen. Not all HD is 1080p (1920x1080). Again, I repeat, NOT ALL HD is 1080p. Unless the original poster said he wanted HD at 1080p resolutions (which he didn't), you shouldn't assume that he was asking for 1920x1080.

 

[Hattig]

I really doubt this. I have a power g4 running at 1.33 ghz and it is about as fast as the p3/800 laptop that it replaced (from about 4 years ago). I also have a g5 which is an incredible fast machine. If you have a chance
actually try this benchmark, use the lame encoder to encode the same mp3 file on both of your systems, and post the timing tests that you get.

Hardly fair to test an extensively SSE, SSE2, etc optimised application against the plain-jane PowerPC version. Looking on Google I saw plenty of stuff that stated that Lame didn't use Altivec in its PowerPC version.

And sorry to change the issue, but what Mac user is going to be using MP3 ahead of AAC when iTunes can rip at 10x speed even on an iBook, and over 20x on a dual G5 system? How fast can iTunes rip on a PC compared to on a Mac? I know it takes 20 minutes on my girlfriends 733PIII to rip a CD compared to around 5 on my iBook.