12" PB vs. new 12" iBooks

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
So now when Apple released new faster iBooks, new iBook is better choice than 12" PB?



How much more faster is 12" PB than new iBooks?

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 19
    I'm not sure. With such a miniscule update and without the price dropping (at least on the 900MHz 12" model) I can't say I'm jumping for joy on the 900MHz iBook \ The powerbook 12" would only cost me an additional 250 pounds in the UK and so seems like a lot better deal? I think the G4 vs. the G3 is a major factor as is the better video card in the powerbook. Also Airport extreme and bluetooth are added bonuses. I know the difference is minimal but another strong impetus for me is that the powerbook is slightly smaller and a touch lighter.
  • Reply 2 of 19
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    normally a 12 inch powerbook is slighty faster than a 12 inch I book (depending on the test, and especially the one who take advantage of altivec). But a 12 inch 1 book at 900 mhz has chance to be in par.

    When i will return home, i will publish benchmarks comparing the 12 powerbook with the older version of the i book.
  • Reply 3 of 19
    escherescher Posts: 1,811member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Retrograde

    With such a miniscule update and without the price dropping (at least on the 900MHz 12" model) I can't say I'm jumping for joy on the 900MHz iBook \ The powerbook 12" would only cost me an additional 250 pounds in the UK and so seems like a lot better deal?



    As I posted in the "New iBooks" thread, I think the doubled VRAM makes the $999 iBook an even better value than before. Not only that, all the BTO options from the PowerBooks are now available for the iBooks as well. E.g. you can BTO the already nice 30GB (50% more than it was before bump) in the $999 iBook to 40GB for $25 and to 60GB for $75. BTO prices are finally reasonable.



    This iBook bump is about value, not pure performance!



    I think the iBook/900 will be just as fast as the 12-inch PowerBook/867 for mundane tasks. But as before, the difference will become apparent with AltiVec apps. In my opinion, however, the true value of the 12-inch PowerBook lies in the added functionality of monitor-spanning and -mirroring, Bluetooth, AirPort Extreme, and last but not least, smaller size and weight.



    Of course, I will still wait for the Rev.B 12-inch PowerBook (with 1+Ghz processor, 1+GB RAM, and DVI-out) to replace my two year-old iBook/500.



    Escher
  • Reply 4 of 19
    lucaluca Posts: 3,833member
    No, the 800/CD now has a 30 GB hard drive, but it's not double what it was before - it used to be 20 GB. Either way, though, it's really nice to have bigger hard drives, even if the update is disappointing.
  • Reply 5 of 19
    ensoniqensoniq Posts: 131member
    We should not be disappointed with the "new" iBook. These minor updates simply make the line a better deal than before. SAME price, with larger hard drives, faster speeds, and more VRAM. (Depending on which model...) MORE for FREE is the way to look at it, and that is always good.



    I would also guess that this is the LAST update for this version of the iBook. If Apple expected this model to be around for a long time, they'd have added Airport Extreme and Bluetooth, like the 12" PowerBook. (Just like they added Airport Extreme and Bluetooth to the 17" iMac Flat-Panel recently.)



    This small yet meaningful upgrade seems, to me, to be a good indicator that the next iBook upgrade will have more "meat". Probably after the PowerBook 12" is upgraded, to make sure it stays far enough ahead of the iBook to warrant the higher price. And the next iBook update will happen AFTER the release of the 970 ... so if we see 970 PowerBooks 3-6 months from now, expect the next iBook after that to be G4 ... minimum.



    -- Ensoniq
  • Reply 6 of 19
    lucaluca Posts: 3,833member
    I'm not disappointed that the iBook got better. I mean, as you said, it's like getting more for free. But look how fast the computer industry is moving! Over the course of five months, it should have probably improved a little more. And this also means that the iBooks will be barely better than they were in November for another 5-6 months. It's good to refresh the line but it should either be more substantial, or more frequent. Although since they updated it after five months instead of the usual 6-7, that might indicate a move toward smaller, more frequent bumps.
  • Reply 7 of 19
    trumptmantrumptman Posts: 16,464member
    I still wish the most important option were available. You still cannot change the drive configuration. You should be able to select more than a cd-rom on the low end iBook.



    Some nice little bumps on the low end though. I might have to find a now "old" combo 800.



    Nick
  • Reply 8 of 19
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Escher

    As I posted in the "New iBooks" thread, I think the doubled VRAM makes the $999 iBook an even better value than before. Not only that, all the BTO options from the PowerBooks are now available for the iBooks as well. E.g. you can BTO the already nice 30GB (double what it was before bump) in the $999 iBook to 40GB for $25 and to 60GB for $75. BTO prices are finally reasonable.



    This iBook bump is about value, not pure performance!



    I think the iBook/900 will be just as fast as the 12-inch PowerBook/867 for mundane tasks. But as before, the difference will become apparent with AltiVec apps. In my opinion, however, the true value of the 12-inch PowerBook lies in the added functionality of monitor-spanning and -mirroring, Bluetooth, AirPort Extreme, and last but not least, smaller size and weight.





    Escher you are right about the bottom end iBooks which still hold much of their value and have, as you pointed out, gotten better graphics and better options for bto. When I wrote the above I was considering the relative values of the combo iBook to the 12" powerbook which I still think is virtually a no brainer in favour of the powerbook.



    I, too, think the iBooks are about value more than performance which is why my grumbles about the iBook largely come down to money: I think they (in particular the high end 12" iBook) should have dropped their price point from where they were with this update. The update was fairly meager (although not unwelcome! ) and would have been greeted far more favourably if Apple had dropped the prices a little (particularly on the combo iBook 12").



    My iBook 500 seems to be finished and so I am having to look at an unexpected purchase (I really did not want to pay for a new machine until at least i could afford a G4 machine). I am certainly pleased with the update to the bottom end iBook as that is the only one that I can seriously entertain at the moment. \
  • Reply 9 of 19
    Quote:

    Originally posted by trumptman

    I still wish the most important option were available. You still cannot change the drive configuration. You should be able to select more than a cd-rom on the low end iBook.





    Yes, this is something that is quite disappointing. Apple should at least offer the option of CD burner for those of us concerned about backing up/sharing material while on the road. When did Apple kill off the 3 or 4 options they originally had with these iBooks?
  • Reply 10 of 19
    mcqmcq Posts: 1,543member
    Barely glanced at the updates so far (just woke up), but from what little I skimmed from the Apple Store and here, it seems like the low-end is very good (now 32mb vram, 30 gb hd, and 800 MHz). I know what you people are saying with on the optical drive thing, but if they offered CD-RW, or a Combo-Drive, they'd most likely cannibalize the mid-range as I see it. Even if they did something like $100 for CD-RW, then you'd be paying only $1125 for an 800Mhz iBook with similar specs to the mid-range (diff being the DVD, 100 MHz, 10GB, which I consider negligible to value customers), a $175 savings over the mid-range. If they did a combo-drive at $150, then it'd be something like $1175 (diff being 100MHz and 10GB, again I think neglibile to the extreme value segment), so that's $125 savings to the consumer, which translates into lost profit for Apple, which I don't think would be satisfied by overwhelming demand.
  • Reply 11 of 19
    paulpaul Posts: 5,278member
    personally I'd rather have a DVD drive option rather then a CD-RW, on a lappy anyway... plus that wouldn't cannibalize sales too much, and then they could move all their (restore) software over to DVDs



    DVD drives should be the minimum across every apple lineup
  • Reply 12 of 19
    escherescher Posts: 1,811member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Retrograde

    [My iBook 500 seems to be finished and so I am having to look at an unexpected purchase (I really did not want to pay for a new machine until at least i could afford a G4 machine). I am certainly pleased with the update to the bottom end iBook as that is the only one that I can seriously entertain at the moment. \



    Retrograde: See my post in the New iBooks thread in Current Hardware as well. Is your iBook/500 really beyond repair? I agree with your desire to wait for a G4, I'm doing the same. With that desire in mind, I swallowed a $300 repair last December. If you haven't already done so, I suggest that you have an Apple dealer properly diagnose your iBook (cheaper than an actual repair) to see if you really can't repair it.



    Cheers,

    Escher
  • Reply 13 of 19
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Escher

    Retrograde: See my post in the New iBooks thread in Current Hardware as well. Is your iBook/500 really beyond repair? I agree with your desire to wait for a G4, I'm doing the same. With that desire in mind, I swallowed a $300 repair last December. If you haven't already done so, I suggest that you have an Apple dealer properly diagnose your iBook (cheaper than an actual repair) to see if you really can't repair it.



    Cheers,

    Escher




    Well, I'm not sure it is beyond repair or not. I will have to bring it in to an Apple Certified Repair shop and the diagnosis will cost me 50 pounds. Of course it has to be shipped as well so that will cost me somewhere around 15 pounds each way and then I have been told that if the only problem I have (which seems to be a certainty) is the optical drive that it will cost £367.50 to replace. By this point I will have paid approximately 450 pounds just to get the machine diagnosed and the combo drive replaced and a new bottom end iBook would only set me back 770 pounds. The repairs in Britain do not come cheap: I could get this repaired in Canada for less than half the cost here!



    And if the problem turns out to be with the motherboard, which is certainly possible, then there is no way I consider a repair. Oh well, too many moans and grumbles this evening for what should be a lively and cheerful discussion of the Ghosts of Macworld Future! Now if Apple only produced a small tablet for less than the cost of an entry-level iBook and which ran the Mac OS... I would be in heaven
  • Reply 14 of 19
    murbotmurbot Posts: 5,262member
    *cough*

    buysafewareinsuranceandthrowitoffabalcony

    *cough*



    DEFINATELY DO NOT DO THAT.
  • Reply 15 of 19
    Quote:

    Originally posted by murbot

    *cough*

    buysafewareinsuranceandthrowitoffabalcony

    *cough*



    DEFINATELY DO NOT DO THAT.




  • Reply 16 of 19
    lucaluca Posts: 3,833member
    The iBook now has a bit more going for it because it now uses DDR video RAM just like the PowerBook. Previously, it used SDR video RAM. So the graphics performance will be better, even when comparing the previous 32 MB version to the new 32 MB verison.
  • Reply 17 of 19
    paulpaul Posts: 5,278member
    i was under the impression that it has (basically) always used DDR vram... are you sure? ::fires up mactracker::
  • Reply 18 of 19
    paulpaul Posts: 5,278member
    wow guess not.... I cannot believe apple used parts that were THAT outdated....
  • Reply 19 of 19
    lucaluca Posts: 3,833member
    I thought they used DDR too but a friend just told me about it, so I went to Apple's website and sure enough, the previous revision had either 16 MB or 32 MB of SDRAM, and the new one has 32 MB of DDR SDRAM. I didn't know for sure until I saw both, and I assumed that the "SDR" was left out of the "SDR SDRAM" for the previous revision. I suppose that's the naming convention - single datarate is SDRAM and double datarate is DDR SDRAM.
Sign In or Register to comment.