Powerbooks? iBooks?

arn

macrumors god
Original poster
Staff member
Apr 9, 2001
14,499
1,783
MacOS Rumors updated with a new rumor on possible PowerBook and iBook upgrades later this year:

Apple's Titanium PowerBook is in for a change at Mac World New York. It will not be getting a case changing, but many other things will change

Upgrades include 1536x1024 rez, larger drives, batteries, and increased bus speed to 133MHz as well as processor bumps.

Their "source" also hints at faster G3 iBooks as well as 14" across the line.
 

arn

macrumors god
Original poster
Staff member
Apr 9, 2001
14,499
1,783
Re: typo?

Originally posted by Unregistered
did you mean faster G3 iBooks?
yep... it was a typo.

arn
 

BeerDrinker29

macrumors regular
Jan 23, 2002
139
0
Well that's a no brainer

Nothing really new there, except for that screen resolution. The iBook line moving to 14 inch screens has been around for awhile. I hope it's not true..
 

kishba

macrumors 6502a
Dec 11, 2001
610
0
Michigan
Re: Well that's a no brainer

Originally posted by BeerDrinker29
Nothing really new there, except for that screen resolution. The iBook line moving to 14 inch screens has been around for awhile. I hope it's not true..
noooooo the ibook needs to keep a 12 inch screen! it should continue to be a full featured "sub" notebook
 

digitalrampage

macrumors regular
Jan 5, 2001
156
32
Sydney, Australia
NO TO 14inch!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I work in an Apple reseller, and the 14 inch iBooks are not that incredibly popular.

The best feature about the 12 inch iBook is its size... thats a major selling point to children, students etc...

To go 14 inch across the line would be stupid! A higher res on the top of the line would be good, but ditching the 12 inch would certainly reduce sales...

:eek:

So dont say DieBook... the 12 inch has to stay, in at least a combo format.
 

OSeXy!

macrumors regular
Jan 17, 2002
239
0
London (or virtually here)
Ever since the iBook was introduced, I thought the margin around the edge of the screen looked quite large (compared to the TiBook). I always thought apple might replace it with a 13-incher when prices fell on LCDs. This would give it the virtue of a larger screen, while keeping the same tiny footprint. If they can do that, I'd dump the 14-inch from the line...
 

arn

macrumors god
Original poster
Staff member
Apr 9, 2001
14,499
1,783
Re: NO TO 14inch!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally posted by digitalrampage
I work in an Apple reseller, and the 14 inch iBooks are not that incredibly popular.

The best feature about the 12 inch iBook is its size... thats a major selling point to children, students etc...
and to adults :)

I agree... I love the small-size of the iBook... in fact, I wouldn't mind if Apple tried to make smaller portable even....

arn
 

clonenode

macrumors regular
Feb 12, 2002
113
0
All of the tooling is made and in place for the 14" iBook to stay, but it IS interesting to consider the possibility of a larger screen in the smaller iBook. At the current (smaller) size, the iBook is incredibly popular and powerful. I can't see them phasing it out unless it is to be replaced by some kind of keyboardless, touchscreen tablet style portable.


c l o n e n o d e
o n e o f m a n y
 

imspace2

macrumors member
Dec 6, 2001
91
3
Maryland
14in iBook My Opinion

I really like the size and portability of the 12in model lot easier to fit in a backpack or something I think they should keep both models available. The new 14 looks kind of empty anyway when you open it up around the palm rests and such.
 

grrr223

macrumors regular
Jan 17, 2002
111
0
Philadelphia
Keep the 12 inch ibooks! Cost alone is one reason. You can get a 500mhz 12 inch iBook for what $1,000 or $1,100 these days, but it's about $1,800 to buy the 14 inch one. Yes I realize it's 600 mhz, but there are a lot of people (like me) who just couldn't afford the 14 inch one but would buy the $1,000 ibook in a heartbeat if I had the money.
 
U

Unregistered

Guest
Keep 12in AND 14in iBooks

Here's my thoughts -

When Apple first came out with the 12in iBook, I loved everything about it except that tiny screen you had to squint at.

I thought the 14in screen prefected the model. Before, I was considering a Pismo or Lombard - simply because of the screen. Now I'm looking at the 14in iBook.

I do agree though that it is a bit pricey.
 

dongmin

macrumors 68000
Jan 3, 2002
1,708
0
the 14" iBook is lame

Orignally I thought it was a good way to round out the product line. But now, after seeing it in person, I don't like it at all. The extra size doesn't add anything to the iBook other than larger screen (at the same resolution). They didn't do anything with the extra space around the palm rest and keyboard. It would've been nice if they added bigger speakers or more F keys or a PC card slot. But nil. It just looks like a bloated iBook. Bad design. Bad Apple.
 

cleo

macrumors 65816
Jan 21, 2002
1,186
0
Tampa Bay Area, FL, USA
I'm planning on buying an iBook this summer. Ideally (although I'm not sure if it's realistic) I'd much rather see a G4 12-inch than have to buy a G3 14-inch. The small footprint is what makes the iBook so unique, in my opinion. Better to make it more snappy than more bulky. Just my $.02!
 

alex_ant

macrumors 68020
Feb 5, 2002
2,473
0
All up in your bidness
I want 1152x864 or 1280x1024 in the iBooks. If the iBook had a 12" 1152x864 screen, I would have bought that instead of the PB G4 550. 1024x768 is just too low for me, and I would imagine it's too low for a lot of people, especially those who use OS X and have 8 web browser windows, a word processor, an MP3 player, numerous Finder windows, etc. all open at the same time. (1152x768 is too low for me also, but there's not much I can do besides get used to it.)

If there were an 1152x864 or 1280x1024 12" iBook, I would swap my PowerBook for it in a heartbeat. Oh, how I wish...

1536x1024 would be fantastic for the PowerBooks, and much needed. As it is, whenever I have to do anything more than light web browsing or word processing, I *have* to hook up a 1600x1200 monitor because 1152x768 is just not enough. IMO, the PBG4's low resolution is one of its only drawbacks.

For the PBG4, how about AirPort antennae mounted on the top/sides of the screen?

Alex
 

Xapplimatic

macrumors 6502
Oct 23, 2001
417
0
California
PowerBook bus speed..

Upgrades include 1536x1024 rez, larger drives, batteries, and increased bus speed to 133MHz as well as processor bumps...
The PowerBook system bus is already @ 133 MHz as of the last speed bump (on the higher model). What they meant for those who don't bother to read the original article was that even the lower model PowerBooks will now also have 133 MHz bus speed making it standard across the board.

Hopefully they will standardise the iBook line in the same way dropping the 66 Mhz bus from the lower models. Probably they won't do that until they've used up their stockpile of 66 MHz iBook motherboards (just a guess).
 

mac15

macrumors 68040
Dec 29, 2001
3,099
0
14inch screen not a good idea
people like the smallness of the ibook
why change something that already good
 

rekras

macrumors regular
Sep 3, 2001
172
0
NJ
I wonder if Apple will upgrade the ibook to a G4, canceling out the G3 across the product lineup. I think they'll do this sometime late next year when G5s are available for powerbooks. The G4 in the ibook would most likely come with a new design, although it's hard to imagine an ibook with a better design than the current model...
 

AlphaTech

macrumors 601
Oct 4, 2001
4,556
0
Natick, MA
I have a question for everyone wishing for higher resolutions in the laptops... Have you actually thought about what that will do to everything on the screen??? At 1152x768 in the TiBook, everything is sized just right. Especially with you being able to adjust the size of the desktop icons. While I can understand some people wanting a bit higher numbers, anything approaching 1536x1024 or 1600x1200 on the 15.2" screen is going to be TINY! I can't imagine putting either of those onto either the 12" or 14" iBook.

What size screen are you using with the 1600x1200 resolution, a 21"? Unless you have ungodly, or bionic, eyes, the higher resolutions are going to be a strain (on the built in displays).

Having the resolutions available for external screens does make sense, but not onto the built in lcd.

Any rebuttals??
 

cmoney

macrumors regular
Feb 4, 2002
108
0
Originally posted by AlphaTech
I have a question for everyone wishing for higher resolutions in the laptops... Have you actually thought about what that will do to everything on the screen??? At 1152x768 in the TiBook, everything is sized just right. Especially with you being able to adjust the size of the desktop icons. While I can understand some people wanting a bit higher numbers, anything approaching 1536x1024 or 1600x1200 on the 15.2" screen is going to be TINY! I can't imagine putting either of those onto either the 12" or 14" iBook.

What size screen are you using with the 1600x1200 resolution, a 21"? Unless you have ungodly, or bionic, eyes, the higher resolutions are going to be a strain (on the built in displays).

Having the resolutions available for external screens does make sense, but not onto the built in lcd.

Any rebuttals??
I agree, getting 1536x1024 on a 15.2" screen would make things unreadable...until the day that OS X is resolution independent. Then you can use the higher resolution for better anti-aliasing. Until that day, I think the if they took the DPI of the 12" iBook and put it on the 15.2" LCD in the PBG4, it would give more usable space for OS X. (Though with some people complaining about the DPI on the iBook, combined with the fact that the typical PBG4 user is older than the average iBook user (and thus may have worse eyes), maybe Apple realized this and kept the PBG4 with a lower res.)

And is it just me or does OS X just use up lots of space? I'm running 1600x1200 on my 19" CRT and it seems just like 1280x1024 under OS 9. Apps like Finder use larger fonts with no way to change it so the higher resolution gives relatively the same size characters but with higher DPI. I think with OS X as the default. there is a need to have higher resolutions now.
 
U

Unregistered

Guest
Originally posted by AlphaTech
I have a question for everyone wishing for higher resolutions in the laptops... Have you actually thought about what that will do to everything on the screen??? At 1152x768 in the TiBook, everything is sized just right. Especially with you being able to adjust the size of the desktop icons. While I can understand some people wanting a bit higher numbers, anything approaching 1536x1024 or 1600x1200 on the 15.2" screen is going to be TINY! I can't imagine putting either of those onto either the 12" or 14" iBook.

What size screen are you using with the 1600x1200 resolution, a 21"? Unless you have ungodly, or bionic, eyes, the higher resolutions are going to be a strain (on the built in displays).

Having the resolutions available for external screens does make sense, but not onto the built in lcd.

Any rebuttals??
If by "everything is sized just right" you mean "everything is sized just right for my half-blind grandmother to see through her 14-ounce bifocals," then yes, everything is sized just right. As it is now, I can see the individual pixels and their black outlines (albeit barely) on my TiBook from 2 feet away, and I don't think I have ungodly/bionic eyes. Actually, I'm terribly nearsighted and wear glasses.

I don't think 1600x1200 on an iBook is a good idea. Actually, I think it's a very bad idea. I <i>do</i> however think 1536x1024 on a PowerBook is a good idea. The PowerBook is Apple's professional portable. It's a portable workstation (well, it would be if OS X weren't so butt slow, but that's another discussion). Apps like FCP, Photoshop, etc. would be SO MUCH more pleasant to use in 1536x1024 than 1152x768 it's not even funny.

Mac OS X takes up a lot more space than OS 9 does/did - all the finder windows/fonts are bigger, and then there's the dock, which shaves off a good portion of the screen even when it's made small. I am running my PowerBook at 1600x1200 on a 19" monitor at the moment, and it's very nice in OS X. In OS 9 though, yes, I would have to squint.

Now, would 1536x1024 on an LCD be okay? I think so. Even though the screen is smaller, I think people would tend to be closer to it while using it. Also, LCDs are very sharp - small text may be small, but it's not blurry. If the text in your web browser or whatever is too small, well, that's what the font size preferences are there for. :)

Nobody is calling for 1600x1200 on the PowerBook's screen. That resolution is not the same aspect ratio as the screen, so things would appear vertically squashed. I think 1536x1024 = perfect. Even that is less than some comparable PC laptops - but it's still perfect, I think.

The PowerBook can do 1920x1440 to an external display. I definitely don't think anything like THAT is suitable for the LCD. :)

1536x1024 for the PowerBook...
1280x1024 for the 14.1" iBook...
and 1152x864 for the 12.1" iBook.
Perfection! :)

One more thing to consider - and this is not meant to be an insult of any kind - you may want to consider an eye exam if you haven't had one recently. Your eyes' strengths and correction requirements can and often do change very slowly over time without you noticing. Again, not to call you blind as a bat or anything, but it's something to think about. :)

Alex
 

AlphaTech

macrumors 601
Oct 4, 2001
4,556
0
Natick, MA
well 'Unregistered' if that really is your name... get the asbestos shorts on cause here come da flames...

One. I already wear glasses, and everything on my TiBook's screen is crystal clear. I have no problem seeing the tv at over 10' away, nor the 19" screen on my desktop that is a little further.

You can adjust the dock, and you don't have to put all that much in it if you don't want to. I have mine set to between 1/4" and 3/8" tall when not being accessed. I have also set the icon size smaller then default (yes, you can do this too). I do with that they would make the grid size match closer to the icon size (so that things get closer as you make them smaller). Smaller font selections would be helpful, but that is a minor point (and probably will be addressed at a later release/update). MAYBE a 1280x resolution would work for the TiBook, but I think you are delusional if you think anything larger will be comfortable.

I have several users at work that have a hard time with 1024x768 on 14" PowerBook G3 systems (no one on an iMac use anything higher then 800x600 even when 1024x768 is available).

As far as "Apps like FCP, Photoshop, etc. would be SO MUCH more pleasant to use in 1536x1024 than 1152x768 it's not even funny" goes... Maybe in your world, but not in the real one.

No matter how sharp lcd screens are, that tight of a resolution would be friggin tiny. Unless they tighten up the dpi rating of the lcd screens (not likely in the near future) applications will not benefit from the higher resolutions. If anything, it will make them harder to use. Yes, you would be able to fit more tool windows on the screen, but then your document size would not correlate to the real world. How many people expect 1" on the screen (at 100% view) to be either 1" or very close to it on paper??

Designers are a very visual group (I should know, I was one before becoming a tech). To every designer I know (and there are many) they don't care about having an extremely high resolution count. Some even set their 21" screens at 1024x768 since they work on them for 8+ hours at a shot and don't want to kill their eyes. Personally, I have mine set to 1280x1024 (21" screen at work). I have my 17.4" LCD (at home) set to that as well. I have found that to be the optimum for the lcd, my 19" screen (attached to the peecee).

I wouldn't expect Apple to crank the resolutions of their laptops for less then 1% of the people purchasing them. Everyone was cheering when Apple introduced the TiBook with the 15.2", 1152x768 screen. I did not hear ONE complaint about the screen. I have actually had people comment about how great it is, and that anything smaller wouldn't be as good.

I have seen one laptop (a peecee) set to a higher resolution and everything is so friggin small it's not even funny. About a week after the user set that resolution, he had to change it to a lower one because it was giving him too much eye strain (making him tired faster long before when it was set to lower numbers).

All in all, I think Apple got the resolutions right, and they shouldn't change them. If they do, then 1280x1024 would be the maximum that I can recommend or will use on any screen.

Then again, it's a free country, so set yours to whatever you want, and keep getting those eye exams and paying for new lenses. Personally, my prescription has not changed in the past 2+ years (past two exams, one per year, gave the exact same prescription). I attribute this to getting contact lenses (they can have that affect on some people).
 

DakotaGuy

macrumors 601
Jan 14, 2002
4,007
3,138
South Dakota, USA
Not to sound too dumb here because a lot of you know more then I do about computers, but do you suppose that if they speed up the G3 in the iBook they will go with 14.1" across the board because it provides a bigger case. Maybe the new processor will run hotter and they will need more room for a better cooling system? I love my 12.1" cause it is compact and cool looking with a dang sharp and bright screen.
 

emdezet

macrumors member
Feb 12, 2002
55
0
cologne, germany
i work part time at a German Apple retailer's. myself, i don't like the 14" iBook either, but Germans are buying and ordering them like crazy. most 14" iBook owners do not care for resolution but size. they feel 12" to be simply too small for them.

the big iBook is currently around 2500 Euro,
the 550 TiBook around 3000 Euro.
(1 Euro = 0,86 US cent)

people buy the G3 machine to actually save money. they want the web, email, word processing and a little game now and then on a bigger screen.

but now here's something i desperately need to know.
when hooking up a Pismo, a Ti400MHz and my white 12" iBook to the tv
the latter was the only one to display fullscreen in any app! i love playing unreal tournament on my 29" Sony. but the Pismo and the Ti would run it in window mode only. and obviously without RAVE support. the same is true for iTunes visuals.

so what about that radeon? may i assume it features fullscreen display mode? i want one of these revamped entry-level TiBooks@133MHz. but i am honestly not buying one unless...