x86 laptops are now up to 2.4GHz
<a href="http://www.alienware.com/main/system_pages/area51-m.asp"; target="_blank">Alienware's Area-51M</a>
Not only is it faster than Apple's fastest desktop at a lower price, it is one-third the weight.
And what about it compared to the PowerBooks? At 3.6 times the clockspeed of the fastest PowerBook avaliable, with four times the video memory and a significantly fastest memory subsystem, all at a cheaper price, the PowerBook is looking like its a relict from the 20th century.
And you scream "battery life!" Well, consider OS X is the default operating system shipped and PowerBook users report an average of about 1.5 hours of battery life with normal use(iBook users report even less at 1-1.5 hours).
So we're left with proprietary slow hardware running on a slow, proprietary OS that is heavily CPU bound, all at three times the cost.
When will Apple realize that it's the 21st century?
[ 04-22-2002: Message edited by: Nostradamus ]</p>
Not only is it faster than Apple's fastest desktop at a lower price, it is one-third the weight.
And what about it compared to the PowerBooks? At 3.6 times the clockspeed of the fastest PowerBook avaliable, with four times the video memory and a significantly fastest memory subsystem, all at a cheaper price, the PowerBook is looking like its a relict from the 20th century.
And you scream "battery life!" Well, consider OS X is the default operating system shipped and PowerBook users report an average of about 1.5 hours of battery life with normal use(iBook users report even less at 1-1.5 hours).
So we're left with proprietary slow hardware running on a slow, proprietary OS that is heavily CPU bound, all at three times the cost.
When will Apple realize that it's the 21st century?
[ 04-22-2002: Message edited by: Nostradamus ]</p>
Comments
Intel® Pentium® 4 Processor 2.4GHz 400MHz FSB w/ 512KB Cache
Hi-Performance Heatsink/CPU Cooling Fan
Intel® 845MP+ICH3M Chipset - FC-PGA 478PIN DDR
DDR RAM (PC-2100)
ATI Mobility RADEON 7500 64MB DDR
It's a little thick and heavy, but look what you're packin' in there. You're literally bringing your desktop with you to do whatever the hell you please! It's pretty cool looking too.
[ 04-22-2002: Message edited by: Patchouli ]</p>
That is the usual response to these types of systems but I say, "So What." Many manufacturers have figured out how to use these processors safely in a notebook design. The fact that Intel doesn't like it means nothing. They just don't want their mobile line to be cannibalized by the faster, cheaper desktop model.
Sure, you sacrifice thickness and weight, but that is a fair compromise IMO. These systems are designed to be portable, (easy to transport from one place to another), not mobile, (heavily used while in transport). As far as battery life goes, they offer you enough battery life to get you where you are going. At that point, you can plug it in again. As for heat, I have heard of no problems from these new desktop portables. I have heard of PowerBooks that you could fry an egg on, though. Bottom line, these are excellent desktop alternatives and I am strongly tempted by them myself.
<strong>I don't know of any iBook users getting 1 hour of battery life out of their machines. Where are you getting this info?</strong><hr></blockquote>
<a href="http://forums.macnn.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=13&t=003352"; target="_blank">http://forums.macnn.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=13&t=003352</a>;
OS X doesn't have any advanced power management features.
We're stuck with subpar hardware running on an incomplete and slow OS at three times the cost.
[ 04-22-2002: Message edited by: Nostradamus ]</p>
<strong>"This is a desktop processor in a notebook."
That is the usual response to these types of systems but I say, "So What." Many manufacturers have figured out how to use these processors safely in a notebook design. The fact that Intel doesn't like it means nothing. They just don't want their mobile line to be cannibalized by the faster, cheaper desktop model.
Sure, you sacrifice thickness and weight, but that is a fair compromise IMO. These systems are designed to be portable, (easy to transport from one place to another), not mobile, (heavily used while in transport). As far as battery life goes, they offer you enough battery life to get you where you are going. At that point, you can plug it in again. As for heat, I have heard of no problems from these new desktop portables. I have heard of PowerBooks that you could fry an egg on, though. Bottom line, these are excellent desktop alternatives and I am strongly tempted by them myself.</strong><hr></blockquote>Oh, I agree! I was pointing out that the Mobile P4 is currently up to 1.8GHz (maxed). Also, this bad boy can hold two batteries and still have the combo drive in! This will help a lot I think.
General tenents of semiconductors:
higher clock = higher power dissipation
smaller feature size = higher power dissipation
So the way that Intel makes it "Mobile" is by redoing a significant amount of logic, so that the chip has fewer transistors. The idea that there's more than one way to skin a cat holds true in boolean logic, though the idea that the simplest answer is always best does not hold true in electronics.
So the P4 mobile is a much slower version of the P4. I bet it's significantly slower than the P3M 1.13GHz, because by doubling the clock they have to deal with power consumption in other ways, like slowing down the logic by half to compensate.
Intel knows that Mhz sells. They are pretty damn weak chips, though, aside from Mhz. And don't tell me that I'm stuck in an RDF. I know quite a bit more than average about this stuff.
Besides: I get about 3.5-4 hours of life in OS X on my G4. That is critical to me, also. I also care about noise. Since I don't play games, having a rig such as the one mentioned doesn't mean much to me. Next, since LCDs aren't ideal for games, you have to wonder if this machine is worth it's weight in salt.
[ 04-22-2002: Message edited by: Splinemodel ]</p>
don't feed the trolls.
edit: splinemodel: i've got the same hardware and I generally get about 2-2.5 hours in OS X... what gives?
[ 04-22-2002: Message edited by: Jonathan ]</p>
Of course, you are right. So hard to remember sometimes.
Seriously, if it bothers you that much that you are "...stuck with subpar hardware running on an incomplete and slow OS at three times the cost." then please, do us all a favor, and buy yourself a nice, cheap PC.
Have fun.
[ 04-22-2002: Message edited by: Calvin ]</p>
<strong>
<a href="http://forums.macnn.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=13&t=003352"; target="_blank">http://forums.macnn.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=13&t=003352</a>;
OS X doesn't have any advanced power management features.
We're stuck with subpar hardware running on an incomplete and slow OS at three times the cost.
[ 04-22-2002: Message edited by: Nostradamus ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
can't speak for the iBook but my Powerbook G4 667 under OS X gets much more than 1 hour.
On my trip to Myrtle Beach I was able to watch Tombstone on the bus on the trip there without the battery dieing. That's dvd playback with screen brightness near max for about 2 hours.
Just using it for iPhoto, my digitial camera and Internet in my hotel room I easily managed 3 hours.
OS 9 DOES increase battery life a lot but not so much on these pwerbooks as on other machines because the latest G4s don't have processor scaling (reducing)
<strong>Ah, yet again when someone brings up the subject of fast PC's, they get the "Well then go by a PC you ****er!" So typical, it really gets annoying. You're so in love with this company (Apple) that you can't even see that this is significant and it is a real problem for Apple.</strong><hr></blockquote>
it is very sad and it is very annoying.
I don't see any chance of Apple competing in this new portable area. In order to compete they will have to produce new line above the current Powerbook that is basically a 2 inch thick Powerbook G4 Titanium. Basically a TiBook on Steroids.
iBook 12.1 - 1299-1599
iBook 14.1 - 1799
Powerbook G4 Ti- 2199-2799
Powerbook G4 Ti Ultra - 2499- 3499
Name could use some work
Differences?
Powerbook g4 Ti
667 and 800 Mhz
256 and 512 MB RAM
30 and 40 GB HD
Radeon mobility 32 MB DDR
133 Mhz Bus
Combo Drive
Higher resolution 15.2 inch display
Powerbook G4 Ti Ultra
867- 1Ghz
512 and 1GB RAM
40 and 60 GB HD
Radeon GL Mobility 64 or 128 MB DDR RAM
133 Mhz Bus (DDR ain't happening for apple
Possible Superdrive
possible 16 inch display
2 PC card slots
Perhaps Apple needs another Wallstreet?
Jobs really needs to get help with this silly Vaio envy. It's really hurting the PowerBook in performance, expandability and innovation.
[ 04-22-2002: Message edited by: Nostradamus ]</p>
No 2 designs. Not gonna happen.
15.x" 1400x960 display
32 meg graphics
867 low end, 1 GHZ high end.
SuperDrive. slot loader. slower than newest desktop version though- original SuperDrive speed.
133 bus. still.
The only thing faster is DVD read speed and CD-R/RW write speed.
<strong>This however isn't really even a laptop if it needs to be plugged in all the time...</strong><hr></blockquote>
It is capable of supporting up to two batteries and a DVD/CD-RW combo drive all at the same instant.
So no, it does not need to be plugged in all the time.
[ 04-22-2002: Message edited by: Nostradamus ]</p>
<strong>Ah, yet again when someone brings up the subject of fast PC's, they get the "Well then go by a PC you ****er!" So typical, it really gets annoying. You're so in love with this company (Apple) that you can't even see that this is significant and it is a real problem for Apple.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Nope. Hey, if all you do is complain about Apple hardware, there's an out in PC hardware. People who keep pasting stuff about DDR and MHz advantages in PCs obviously care deeply about those advantages. These are not the advantages many of us care about, but if this gap so incenses people, they SHOULD switch. Why pay for subpar hardware? Buy a PC and get on with your lives.
It seems to me the people who are most blind are the ones who hate people who tell others to "go out and buy a PC then." Think about it. Why are you sticking to Apple if you are so unhappy with the situation? I consider these people to be so in love with Apple. They're willing to be with hardware they hate...WHY?
Go out and buy a PC if you want MHz...maybe Apple will start paying attention. Maybe they won't. You'll be happier either way, won't you? I have a newflash for you...Apple's not going to catch up in the MHz war any time soon...probably never again. If any of you are really hung up on this, you should switch.
Groverat did it. DoctorGonzo did it. They both seem much happier with PCs than Macs. You buy computers because they fit your needs, not because a bunch of nobodies on a messageboard promise you Dual 1.6 GHz G5s and 333 MHz DDR in the future.
[ 04-22-2002: Message edited by: Eugene ]</p>