Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

PPC PowerBook or Intel PowerBook?

yellow said:
But that was a beta.. and put out as such.
Click to expand...

It was? i remember it being the final version they released a beta for developers before that, but i remember buying that OS and thinking how horrible it was, which is why many people remained in OS 9. The box it came in didnt say anything about it being a beta nor did the site description say it was. Im trying to show how the Intel Macs may have their faults and many may choose to remain with PPC for the first revisions. I know i will :)
 
it's a really difficult question, but since you are in a rush so to speak, then i think the current powerbooks or ibooks would be best. (not a 15" pb though, unless you don't mind the screen lines). i got a 15" just before the current update and use it for logic etc, very happy with it.
i would be worried about programmes like max/msp on the new machines - i don't know if this is a legitimate concern though.

how about a refurb from apple? that would be quite a cool way to get a machine for less, and you might find one with the right hd...

good luck, i look forward to hearing what you decide to get.
 
Small text on HD displays for those with vision problems?

I'm in a slightly different dilemma. I offloaded my TiBook back in October, figuring either a closeout 15 or a new one, but the availability of the closeout refurbs got spotty for a while, Rosetta performance started to look a lot better on the developer platforms, and of course we all know about the screens on the new ones. I'm in a dilemma because I really need a laptop now but I want an Intel book given that Rosetta looks like it will be viable after all.

So I have a tight decision and I need your help on a tiebreaker. Here it is.

Now that 15 inch combo drive refurbs are in abundance again, I have to note that the closeout 1280x854 screen is an impressive one, like the TiBook but maybe even a little brighter and more even. I know it will work for my eyesight. How have those of you with vision problems been dealing with the new 17 inch model in particular? (We'll leave out the 15, given its troubles for now.) I know it looks great for short periods of use in the store, but what about a full day's work? Anyone with eyestrain or is everyone doing great?

Any comments?
 
I would urge you to give the iBooks some serious consideration, at $785 or so after rebate from Amazon.com it is really hard to say it is a bad deal no matter how slow it is :rolleyes:

Besides right now I find most of Apple's computer lineup quite pathetic, except for the new iMac and the QUAD.

Quad for Quad damage, that's the real bomb :cool:
 
generik said:
I would urge you to give the iBooks some serious consideration, at $785 or so after rebate from Amazon.com it is really hard to say it is a bad deal no matter how slow it is :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

They're back up to $999.99 - $100 mail-in rebate = $899.99, and no tax.

Not too bad, but the 40GB HDD is a bit too small IMO.

I'm personally going to hold out until MWSF to see what happens. If there's nothing new then I'll probably get the refurb 15" combo from Apple and ride out the transition with that... Worried about how well Rosetta will run my PPC software (basic stuff such as Word, Excel, Photoshop, etc.) compared to a 1.5GHz G4 in the PB. Also worried about how long developers will take to port their programs over to Intel.

Hopefully MWSF will be able to answer all my questions.
 
generik said:
It is about 40% penalty. The upside is the processors are significantly faster.
Click to expand...

So it's possible that the faster processors will help compensate for the 40% penalty, making the Intel PowerBooks/iBooks about equal in performance to the current models...?
 
This lines issue is both blown out of the water and hardly a musicians concern. Unless you edit your music by licking the screen, you wont get close enough to notice them.

I love my rev e 15 inch pb.

$
 
Is the Freescale 7448 pin-compatible with the latest 7447 Apple uses in the PowerBook and/or iBook? If it isn't, then Apple would have to do engineering work on a design that "might" have 6-9 months of life - kinda expensive.

I don't see Apple using existing Intel CPUs, such as the Celeron or Pentium Ms for mobile & consumer, or the Pentium D for PowerMacs, which leaves the new chips - remember, Apple was looking ahead at Intel's roadmap. And I don't see the iBook getting Yonah before (or unless) the PowerBook does. The first version is the 32bit, dual-core version dubbed Centrino Duo. It has a 667MHz frontside bus and 2MB of L2 cache, as well as the other bells & whistles of the Napa platform.

Therefore, it makes no sense for Apple to put that dual-core speed demon in the iBook - even if they left it with the Intel integrated graphics, while hobbling the PowerBook with either the present 7447 G4, or, even, the dual-core 7448 (which, if I recall, has a 200MHz fsb).

No, I think it will be PowerBooks "announced" on January 10th, for availability around the first week of February. I believe the iBook may take over some of the present PowerBooks "hi-end" features, but otherwise wait until (around) May, when Intel releases the single-core Yonah, dubbed Centrino Solo(?). If... "IF"... Apple switches the iBook to Intel at MWSF it only makes sense if there's still a "respectable" performance gap between the PowerBook and iBook (lower-performance & clock speed of Yonah, even if both are dual-core; FrWr 800 vs. FrWr 400; Pci-Exp. x16 GPU vs. Intel integrated graphics; S-ATA hd vs. ATA-100 hd; etc.).

And if you feel you need to wait, buying a G4 PowerBook now, consider this: Next after Yonah comes Merom (September-ish). This beast will be a 64bit, dual-core cpu (I think the iMac will wait for this cpu, too, because it's a "sticky" marketing point to drop back from 64bit G5 to 32bit Yonah, even if latter is dual-core). And, for my 2 cents worth, I think that both the iBook and PowerBook lines will split into 4, more-rounded, product offerings:
• iBook "Jr.": 12-13" WS, Yonah single-core, Intel graphics, Centrino 802.11g, etc.
• iBook: 13-15" WS, Yonah dual core mid-perf., 64MB PCI-Exp x16 low-end gpu, Centrino 802.11g, etc.
• PowerBook: 13-15" WS, Yonah dual-core hi-perf., 128MB PCI-Exp x16 mid-range gpu, Centrino 802.11g, etc.
• PowerBook Pro: 15-17" WS HD, Merom dual-core hi-perf., 256-512MB PCI-Exp x16 hi-end gpu, Centrino 802.11n, etc.

Bottomline: I've been limping along on my G3/400 Pismo the past 2 years - it killed 2 DVD-ROM drives in the first 3 months, and the 3rd one died in 2004. I've considered getting the iMac G5, especially after the recent upgrade. But if Apple delivered a Yonah PowerBook in January I'd snap one up. Much of the "Rosseta lag" would be eased (not erased) by the higher clock/bus/gpu speeds. Also, Apple's had MacOS X on Intel since it was in beta. You know they've had "Test Mules" running it on most variants of Intels mobile, desktop and server CPUs in their deepest labs during that time.

Steve's announcement at WWDC this past June wasn't on impulse - it had been "in the works" since Rhapsody. And Logic, now part of Apple's stable, will be one of the first "pro apps" optimized for x86... In fact, by WWDC '06 I predict that all of Apple's Pro apps will be running smoothly on x86. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to see Adobe CS3, Maya, MS Office and other big names all x86-ed before MWSF '07... Alongside Merom comes Conroe for the PowerMac and Woodcrest for the XServe.
 
http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0506intelxbench.html

Says here in this article that rosetta doesn't even touch the G5 (or G4 for that matter) running native software. This may not be an issue with the majority of mac users, but it is an issue with me! I need it to be running CPU-intensive audio/video applications now! I am using a G4 until software is ported natively. No sense in jumping the gun and getting something that runs my current software slower (or not at all)
 
mammajamma said:
I think you guys still misunderstand me. Do you use any of these professional audio applications? During the OS 9 to OS X transition, most of these applications were not immediately available (in fact it took maybe 2 years to get most of these applications ported for OS X from OS 9) and didn't run in classic. Therefore I don't think Max/MSP, SuperCollider, Logic would run well under Rosetta. I suppose it will most likely be almost another year before many of these applications are ported to Intel. Can someone refute me, otherwise I will be planning on getting an PPC PowerBook G4 soon.
Click to expand...

The only ones who know are the manufacturers of these applications. One would hope that they are actively working on porting. At the very least, any serious developer should be testing their application under Rosetta (and according to Apple, if a MacOS X application runs on PowerPC but not on Rosetta, then the developer should file a bug report with Apple).

My personal guess is that Apple will release Powerbooks with fast dual-core processors and iBooks with something slower. New Powerbooks should run everything at least at the same speed as old Powerbooks, even under Rosetta. The exception would be applications that refuse to run on a G3 Macintosh. I don't know too much about these apps; I would think Logic spends quite some time on user interface and displaying graphics and that should be significantly faster on an Intel Powerbook.

With iBooks, the difference between old and new in raw processor power would be less (if my guess is right that iBooks won't get dual core chips), so it may not be the best choice for running applications that are not ported.
 
I think you are wrong here. Logic is less about about graphics and more about pure computational power. For the plug-ins and effects, it takes a tremendous amount of CPU resources. What other normal applications do you know of that have a built in CPU meter in the program? Digital Performer, Logic Audio, Cubase, and Pro Tools all require tremendous amount of CPU power in order to run efficiently. I don't think these programs would run even close to what they are supposed to run in Rosetta.

I'd bet that Apple has Logic already ported to Intel, and it should be announced at Macworld in San Francisco.

For me, I wish it was as simple as just using Logic. Most of the plug-ins and other audio applications won't be ported for some time... I'd imagine it will take 1-1.5 years for some of the applications I need to be ported natively to intel. It'd be great if these applications get ported sooner, but somehow I doubt it since the classic to OS X transition was equally as slow.

This would probably be the same for a certain selection of video applications...although I bet apple has final cut pro already native on intel...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back