PowerBooks in Paris?

[Mineral]

All I know is that I have my money ready and my mouse finger ready to click "buy" on the Apple Store whenever they update the PB's.. and I can't wait!

I'm excited about next week.. I know Apple won't let me down.. even if it's just a faster and/or cheaper PB G4, I don't care.. I just want a good, solid, reliable Apple notebook.

12" PB's are currently on 7-10 day shipping waiting times.. so take that for what it's worth. (guess what happens in 4 days? )

 

[hose this!]

Re: More on PB

Originally posted by the_dalex
I think we can all agree that we would rather have the info early and wait for shipments... this is a horrible way to do business, because they have missed every ship date they estimated for the Supers. I have customers coming in on a daily basis, very angry at me because they have classwork to do and Apple was giving us bad information. Of course, I'm the one who gets blamed... all because they don't want to communicate their plans. I almost have to come to work in an asbestos trenchcoat now...

You're right. This is all your fault.

 

[SeaFox]

Originally posted by hose this!
It's a 64-bit processor, mate.

32. 64. 32. 64.

Think about what this means in terms of how software is going to be developed for Macs from this point forward.

Not much, considering that for the next few years 90% of the Macs will still be 32bit machines.

 

[panphage]

Originally posted by Abercrombieboy
I am not defending Moto, because they have let down Apple fans for a long time, but if the 7457 would allow them to scale the processor higher, with the improved L2 cache, and get a faster bus in it with true DDR support, which won't happen, but if it did I think a lot of people would be very suprised how a 1.25 Ghz 7457 would compare performance wise with a 1.25 G5 especially in Alti-Vec aware apps.

The 7457 has no DDR support. Maybe a future rev. of the chip will, but would they still call it a 7457? That's be a new chip to me. Also, where is Moto suddenly going to get the R&D chops to increase the bus speed of the G4? Or scale the clock speed at an industry-matching pace? They spent a year at 500Mhz back when they still had some decent people in their Microprocessor division. All of those fine engineers have moved on to AMD. Motorolla has no interest in developing chips for desktop computers, they've said as much more than once. They even put their micro division up for sale. Maybe AMD should buy it and kick out chips for apple.

Then again, AMD (whose chips I happen to love, they were my refuge from Intel before OS X rescued me from the entire Wintel world) is not really known for producing low-power, low-heat parts, are they?

 

[yujini]

Announcing a new model and then making the consumers wait is a very bad idea. There has been cases where a company would go bankrupt just because they announced it ahead of time.
(The reason why they went bankrupt? After announcing the new product, everyone waited, and they couldnt get enough R&D and poof it's a goner)

The only people that wait are the people who read macrumors and all those mac websites.

A lot of my friends went and bought the current powerbooks without knowing there would be an update soon.

If apple did announce the new powerbooks ahead of time even the people who don't really have knowledge about the updated for powerbooks would wait.

Though I hope it would be a G5 next week, I don't think apple would just throw away the 7457 chips and go straight to G5s.
(Since they didn't use the 7457 chips on the iMac either. Maybe iBooks?)

 

[art399]

Originally posted by hose this!
It's a 64-bit processor, mate.

32. 64. 32. 64.

Think about what this means in terms of how software is going to be developed for Macs from this point forward.

Not so simple. AFAIK, simply moving from 32-bit to 64-bit probably won't make much of a noticable difference at all unless you run certain types of apps(which of course woudl have to be compiled for 64 bit) that are high-bandwith/CPU-intensive, i.e. enterprise and scientific mainly. Now, there's a lot more to the G5 than just 64-bit. Apple likes to advertise the 64-bitness because it's a number, it sticks in your head, and it's double what other desktop cpu's are...it's pure marketing. The benefit most would see from the G5 would be in the new architecture in general, not strictly from the 64-bitness, so you can't simply say "32. 64. Duh!".

 

[eric67]

where am I wrong

Originally posted by legion
No, you are wrong. The next Centrino product group includes the code-named PentiumM chip Dothan (90nm production, 2MB L2 cache.) (The current PentiumM chip codenamed Banias is 130nm production, 1MB L2 cache, max 1.7Ghz.) There would be no need or place for a celeron centrino; the current ULV 900Mhz Pentium M chip outperforms the celeron.

Centrino, as stated before by others, is merely the package of mobo chipset, wireless card, and Pentium M chip (NOT Pentium 4 M-- these are substantially different chips.) Each of the three groups will be continously updated, but they want to sell them as a group package to OEMs by enticing them with marketing money.

The means for increasing battery life for the Pentium M is through dynamic adjusting of processor speed (8 steps, IIRC) and some below 1Ghz. Average draw of these processors over longterm use is 1watt. This is built into the chip and controlled by the mobo set; both are required.

where am I wrong???
you just explained in more details what I have just said concerning the meaning of centrino (wireless+processor clock adjustment,...)
you disagree only on the Celeron Centrino, then I am sorry but I have read it somewhere on a PC web site, if this is wrong i am sorry
but indeed centrino is more a marketing than technology; it was possible to make a processor including clock adjustement and have a wireless card inside.. without giving it a brand name "centrino", it is a bit like : how to make something new from something already existing....

 

[eric67]

almost for sure

Originally posted by Mineral
All I know is that I have my money ready and my mouse finger ready to click "buy" on the Apple Store whenever they update the PB's.. and I can't wait!

I'm excited about next week.. I know Apple won't let me down.. even if it's just a faster and/or cheaper PB G4, I don't care.. I just want a good, solid, reliable Apple notebook.

12" PB's are currently on 7-10 day shipping waiting times.. so take that for what it's worth. (guess what happens in 4 days? )

here is what will come
12" and 15" @ 1GHz
17" @ 1.25GHz
all with Firewire800, USB2, ....
I can not say more

 

[jaedreth]

I can not say more

I can

FUEL CELLS!

Year of the Notebook!

No longer do you have to worry about battery life or battery drain. Only have to worry about keeping the thing cooled.

Cram in the technology!

Jaedreth

(I know if I'm wrong I'll look like an idiot. But if I'm right I'll look like a genius. Kinda funny. Because I haven't changed in either case. I am what I am.)

 

[mvc]

Re: I can not say more

Originally posted by jaedreth

FUEL CELLS!
No longer do you have to worry about battery life or battery drain. Only have to worry about keeping the thing cooled…

…and where in hell you are going to find replacement methanol cartridges in Saigon/Naples/Montana at 4 in the morning when you can't be plugged in for some reason or other.

Ever had to buy a 35mm film/Spare flash card/MiniDV tape in some out of the way location when you run out - thats the pitfall of consumables rather than rechargeables.

'Course, you could carry a couple of large bottles of a suitable hi-proof alchohol around to recharge both your body and your laptop!

 

[NicoMan]

Originally posted by panphage
The 7457 has no DDR support. Maybe a future rev. of the chip will, but would they still call it a 7457? That's be a new chip to me.

Early Moto roadmaps were talking about the 7457RM, which, IIRC, was supposed to receive a full fledged implementation of DDR bus. But I also remember information a few months back (were they rumours? I can't remember) saying that Moto had dropped that chip...

Oh well...

 

[NicoMan]

Re: almost for sure

Originally posted by eric67
here is what will come
12" and 15" @ 1GHz
17" @ 1.25GHz
all with Firewire800, USB2, ....
I can not say more

You will agree with me that if you are right, seeing the 15" at 1GHz is a massive let-down. Also I don't believe in FW800 on the 12". But wtf do I know anyway?

(On a side note: Allez les Bleus!)

West Side

 

[tomf87]

Re: Re: almost for sure

Originally posted by NicoMan
You will agree with me that if you are right, seeing the 15" at 1GHz is a massive let-down. Also I don't believe in FW800 on the 12". But wtf do I know anyway?

(On a side note: Allez les Bleus!)

West Side

From www.apple-history.com, I found that the PowerMac G4 was introduced in September 1999. The PowerBook G4 was introduced in January 2001.

Why should the G4 to G5 transition for PowerBook happen so quickly? The only reason I could see is the 1.2Ghz G5 (anyone know for sure if these even exist?). But then, with Apple trying to get the PowerMac G5 out the door, I doubt they would try to push two new models with two new processors out as well.

So, maybe they will give the PB's a boost in the G4 realm and G5's next year.

Just to ask so I can go down in some real flames, is there a PowerBook user out there that needs (not just wants) G5 power? From what I've seen all over, everyone agrees that the G5's power is in video editing and what not. If that's the case, the G5 in the PB isn't going to be that useful, as it still has the old PCI bus and not PCI-X.

Someone shoot me before I go on too long... *BANG* Thanks.

 

[hose this!]

Originally posted by SeaFox
Not much, considering that for the next few years 90% of the Macs will still be 32bit machines.

You know, when OSX was launched, 99.99% of the Macs were running OS 9.x.

Who's still developing for OS 9.x now?

 

[hose this!]

Originally posted by art399
Not so simple. AFAIK, simply moving from 32-bit to 64-bit probably won't make much of a noticable difference at all unless you run certain types of apps(which of course woudl have to be compiled for 64 bit) that are high-bandwith/CPU-intensive, i.e. enterprise and scientific mainly. Now, there's a lot more to the G5 than just 64-bit. Apple likes to advertise the 64-bitness because it's a number, it sticks in your head, and it's double what other desktop cpu's are...it's pure marketing. The benefit most would see from the G5 would be in the new architecture in general, not strictly from the 64-bitness, so you can't simply say "32. 64. Duh!".

I'm not talking about what makes the G5 faster/better than its 32 bit predecessors. I'm talking about the way software will be developed for the Mac going forward. If you think the future is in 32-bit software after the release of a 64-bit processor that Apple will begin to migrate its entire product line to, I have some swampland in Florida I'd like to sell you...

 

[OSXconvert]

G5 powerbook is the only way to go

The G4 is dead. Motorolla is worthless. Hopefully Apple will dump the G4 for the powerbooks and just move on with slow G5s. Even 1-1.3 Ghz G5 would be better than a speed-bumped G4. As others have pointed out the G5 at 1.25Ghz burns 19W, about the same as the G4 @ 1Ghz. So why bother with the G4? Duals can't happen so soon without better ventilation. Just put a 1.25Ghz G5 in the first gen G5 powerbook and wait until next year for the fab size to drop down to up the speed. I have never been impressed with the G4, it has always been underwhelming. Better to have a new chip with a fast bus which Apple is dedicating programming resources to.

 

[NicoMan]

Originally posted by hose this!
I'm not talking about what makes the G5 faster/better than its 32 bit predecessors. I'm talking about the way software will be developed for the Mac going forward. If you think the future is in 32-bit software after the release of a 64-bit processor that Apple will begin to migrate its entire product line to, I have some swampland in Florida I'd like to sell you...

I see your point, but even though the future of Apple is with the G5 and its successors, how long is it till Apple shuts down support for the 32-bit chips (G3, G4 anyone ?). If you can hold your breath for a good 5 to 7 years, then... you are good. See? G3+G4 will represent the vast majority of chips in Apple computers for at least 5 years. Hence the boldness of your statement...

eTurkey1998

 

[NicoMan]

Originally posted by hose this!
You know, when OSX was launched, 99.99% of the Macs were running OS 9.x.

Who's still developing for OS 9.x now?

The difference is, you can upgrade with a CD ($100-ish... Smallish pill to swallow). Try and upgrade with a CD your 32-bit processor to a 64-bit processor... You see what I mean?
The thing is, what is going to happen is developpers will insert flags in their programs to take advantage of the 64-bit addressing if it's available. They are not gonna abandon 32-bit chips or make their program incompatible with those just yet (I think).

eGoat1997

 

[the_dalex]

Your theory doesn't explain why the 17 inch models have been unconstrained. I have been following out-of-stock issues through MacPrices for 6 weeks now. The 12 inch and both 15 inch models have been far more constrained than the 17 inch. Therefore it doesn't seem related to either the 867 or the 1 Ghz G4.

The 17" model is much less popular than the 15" model (mainly because of price). They could allocate enough chips to continue production without affecting the 15" production in any significant way. For every one 17-inch PB I sell, I sell twenty 15-inch and ten 12-inch. Also, the lower popularity of the 17" means that many retailers still have stock and production demands are low. Apple is building-to-order as necessary on 12-inch, but had 17-inch inventory available for a while so the channels aren't nearly as empty (I think they originally forecasted much greater demand, they just priced themselves too high). They aren't delaying on the 12-inch, they're just gaining in popularity. Plus, if they are going to refresh the 12-inch, they want stock levels to be low so that they don't need to do much price protection for resellers.

Apple just shipped us another 16 combodrive 15-inchers. Are they going to continue selling two versions if the 15's with different clocks? That's the question I'm most interested in answering... I imagine they might get rid of the 15" combo altogether.

I'm really mad about the iPods... they are pushing a $200 rebate on iPods with a laptop purchase, yet my 10GB models have been on backorder for a month now. I wish they would actually ship the stuff they tell my students to buy... of course, our local Apple store has plenty.

 

[eric67]

Re: Re: almost for sure

Originally posted by NicoMan
You will agree with me that if you are right, seeing the 15" at 1GHz is a massive let-down. Also I don't believe in FW800 on the 12". But wtf do I know anyway?

(On a side note: Allez les Bleus!)

West Side

Yes I will agree, but it is definately not Apple's fault, and I hope here people will understand, motorola has been the main limiting factor... and maybe still is....

 

[Raveny]

Re: Re: Re: almost for sure

<I found that the PowerMac G4 was introduced in September 1999. The PowerBook G4 was introduced in January 2001.>



When you look at apple-history again you will notice that the G3 Powerbook came out at the same time with the G3 Powermac! And now the G5 is also from IBM like the G3s. And I think that after 10+ month there can't be just a 0.25 speed bump.

When Steve Jobs announce new Powerbooks in Paris there won't be another keynote with new PB from SJ in the new future. Or do you think that he comes up with PB again in 6 month or so? Either it will be the G5 PB or a G4 with an extra. If G4 is in it the G5 will come out later than early 2004.

Sorry for any mistakes. I don't have written or spoken English for 2 years.

Greetings

 

[art399]

Originally posted by hose this!
I'm not talking about what makes the G5 faster/better than its 32 bit predecessors. I'm talking about the way software will be developed for the Mac going forward. If you think the future is in 32-bit software after the release of a 64-bit processor that Apple will begin to migrate its entire product line to, I have some swampland in Florida I'd like to sell you...

Fair enough, and i agree, but i was responding to your response to the question:

Ok - let me ask this: how much faster might a G5 underclocked at say 1.2 ghz in a powerbook be than a 1.25 ghz G4 ?

Would there be a difference? For which applications? I understand something of the G5 architechture is much better, but in day to day performance? Until 10.3?

The question is, how much of a difference *now*, for day-to-day apps...not a couple years down the road.

 

[lord_flash]

Re: Re: Re: almost for sure

Originally posted by eric67
Yes I will agree, but it is definately not Apple's fault, and I hope here people will understand, motorola has been the main limiting factor... and maybe still is....

Well, Apple chose the supplier and Apple make the computers, so who's fault is it? I have no relationshiip with Motorola as a consumer, so I don't see why I should hold them and not Apple responsible when something seems wrong.

If you couldn't buy a seafood meal at a reasturant because they had run out, it's their fault for underestimating demand, not the fishes fault for failing to swim into the nets.

 

[machem]

Re: Re: Re: Re: almost for sure

Originally posted by Raveny
<I found that the PowerMac G4 was introduced in September 1999. The PowerBook G4 was introduced in January 2001.>



When you look at apple-history again you will notice that the G3 Powerbook came out at the same time with the G3 Powermac! And now the G5 is also from IBM like the G3s. And I think that after 10+ month there can't be just a 0.25 speed bump.

When Steve Jobs announce new Powerbooks in Paris there won't be another keynote with new PB from SJ in the new future. Or do you think that he comes up with PB again in 6 month or so? Either it will be the G5 PB or a G4 with an extra. If G4 is in it the G5 will come out a later than early 2004.

Sorry for any mistakes. I don't have written or spoken English for 2 years.

Greetings

I think it is quite irrelevant to use release dates of previous G3 desktops/laptops or release dates of G4 desktops/laptops as evidence of a G5 laptop's release. Clearly, it has been done both ways. If Apple is ready to put a G5 in a Powerbook, they will. It would be a huge revenue enhancer and would raise their stature. There would be no reason to hold back, despite what conspiracy theorists say.

Christmas, no sooner, I think, though I'd love to be proved wrong.

 

[SeaFox]

Re: Re: Re: Re: almost for sure

Originally posted by lord_flash
Well, Apple chose the supplier and Apple make the computers, so who's fault is it? I have no relationshiip with Motorola as a consumer, so I don't see why I should hold them and not Apple responsible when something seems wrong.

Because Apple is as much a victim as you. They want to relese that G4 Powerbook to you, believe me they do. But if they don't have the parts to make them, well, too bad. Apple didn't know Motorola was gonna be such trouble when they first enlisted them to make the processors. And they haven't changed suppliers because not that many companies are interested and there's the Altivec licensing.

If you couldn't buy a seafood meal at a reasturant because they had run out, it's their fault for underestimating demand, not the fishes fault for failing to swim into the nets.

That's assuming they are the only restaurant without fish. The problems here is just what you said - the fish failed to swim into the nets.

You're taking the classic whiny consumer view. Of corse you want to complain at Apple, you have only one degree of separation between you and them. It's far easier and more satisfying to your ego to yell at Apple than Motorola. Like all those videogame fans who yelled at Wal-Mart employees when the Playstation 2 came out and every store got less than six systems for the initail launch. Sony simply didn't have production ramped up for the demand, but people got mad at whoever was handy to scream at.