Give us side ports, rugged enclosure, better Airport signal strength, tray-loading Superdrive and 16"+ display.</strong><hr></blockquote>
A 16" display!!?!?!!!!!
Me: excuse me, what is that thing on your back?
You: " Oh, that's my new laptop, it only weighs 65 pounds, and it has a 72" display..."
Me:
My GOD man, the current display is almost too big for a laptop. Come on, be real! <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
I agree. Leave the dislpay alone. Its awesome right now. Any bigger would be ridiculous.
I don't mind the ports on the back except for the ethernet port. I find its hard to click the cable out becuase the bottom of the display is kinda in the way. I guess an airport base station would solve that.
Give us side ports, rugged enclosure, better Airport signal strength, tray-loading Superdrive and 16"+ display.
Way to go BJNY, you just described the new Sony Vaio notebook minus airport capability...is that what we really want. I worked at a Best Buy and all my fellow employees were in awe of my Titanium and really admired the slot loading option, saying it should be on all notebooks. My titanium has been everywhere, from school, to home, in my car, and even to Europe and back. It is rugged enough to take some punishment. It's not designed to be dropped and scraped along concrete...
<strong>I agree. Leave the dislpay alone. Its awesome right now. Any bigger would be ridiculous. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes, the display size is nice for a small laptop. But I would like to see higher resolutions like 1280x1024+. My Bro bought a Dell laptop ( <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> I told him not to... MANY problems!) and the only feature I like better than my powerbook is the 1600x1200 15.1 inch screen. That screen is SHARP!
a 15.1 inch screen with a 1600 x 1200 resolution would be a deal maker for me. I have always disliked how low resolution portable displays have been to date. I wonder if Apple values that sort of small screen high res opportunity.
The side ports on the iBook are one of the reasons why I chose it over a new Titanium. Every time I wanted to connect a printer, mouse, or CD burner to my old Titanium, I found having to flip the back cover down very annoying and awkward. I also worry about warping it, since it was is thin.
Yes, I too hope the next line of PowerBooks do include side ports like the iBook.
My only complaint now is the fact that the ports are on the left side. It would be much nicer if they were on the right. That way, my mouse cable wouldn't get in the way.
Also I would like the next line of PowerBooks to feature a display hinge like the current iBooks. I love the way the screen folds down and away. This allows the iBook to be more compact when closed and positions the display at a much better viewing angle when open. Subtle details like this are what makes the iBook design in many ways superior to the TiBook's.
New PowerBook designs should draw from the iBooks strengths. I want Apple's next pro notebook to better designed and more rugged. Then perhaps I'll pay extra for one.
A bigger display may not be so ridiculous if Apple decided to make a video-editing desktop replacement powerhouse.
It's just an inch. Sony already makes one such model. They could just make it wider without making it taller. I don't think you'd notice an inch more width.
In another thread I juggled some CPU costs and power/heat numbers and I found that it would be possible to do a DP machine (with two slightly slower CPU's) for about the same cost and energy/heat characteristics as one very fast PPC. Add a bigger battery and a extra cooling and such a machine would really only have to be about a pound heavier and a hair thicker. It is possible cause a proc has to get a lot hotter and hungrier just to get a little faster, thus 2 slightly slower CPU's can be arranged so they produce less heat (over a wider area).
I think people would buy a 1.2" thick, DP800, 6.5lbs Ti at slightly over 14" wide. The current machine is 13.4" wide, but even if the book doesn't get any taller you're still measuring screen size in diagnals, the increase in actual width would be around 3/4".
It's not size, it's resolution that counts. 1280*854 is pretty good, but the reality is it's only around 50% better than my c1996 PB5300. My baseline for a usable display is 1,000px deep - especially with X.
I'd probably compromise at 1440*900 (17" iMac), but if you look around the PC laptop market there are plenty of machines running 1600*1200 at 15" - that's where Apple should be.
Size and resolution both count. Too many people have eye trouble and it doesn't get any better as you age. Some of us need bigger pixels, not just more. Of course, when the OS/GPU are finally capable of smoothly and intelligently scaling everything, then manufacturers can feel free to cram as many pixels as they like into a display. For now, it doesn't hurt to make a screen as big as possible either.
15" may be the practical limit for a laptop, but 16" in a wide (or even wider) format could make a laptop that is really only about 3/4 of an inch wider than the current Ti and no taller.
<strong>I'd probably compromise at 1440*900 (17" iMac), but if you look around the PC laptop market there are plenty of machines running 1600*1200 at 15" - that's where Apple should be.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Where I work, we have a grand total of 26 Dells with those 15" 1600 x 1200 screens. Without exception, every single one runs at 10x7, most with large fonts enabled.
I'm much happier with a native resolution that most people can comfortably use than a very high resolution that forces the average person to run on a scaled screen full time - especially since LCDs aren't very good at that. If you polled the number of people who actually run those laptops at full resolution I think you'd be amazed at the size of the result.
i disagree with the ports on the side, at least the usb. I think the usb should be on the back because if the usb are on the left side like on the ibook you have to run your mouse cord around the back.
i guess it's okay if you have wirless or if you are left handed.
I like the ports on the back, but the door should retract. It's hard to use the powerbook on your lap with anything plugged in, like a trackball, because you contstantly have to be careful not to push the door up on the left side and bend it, or push it up on the right side and bend the plug.
What would really be great would be a usb and firewire port on each side. The ports for the external monitor, ethernet and such are better off on the back.
Yeah, but should it have a USB 2, FW 1 and a FW 2 port on each side ? <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
Comments
Give us side ports, rugged enclosure, better Airport signal strength, tray-loading Superdrive and 16"+ display.
<strong>Yes, I agree.
Give us side ports, rugged enclosure, better Airport signal strength, tray-loading Superdrive and 16"+ display.</strong><hr></blockquote>
A 16" display!!?!?!!!!!
Me: excuse me, what is that thing on your back?
You: " Oh, that's my new laptop, it only weighs 65 pounds, and it has a 72" display..."
Me:
My GOD man, the current display is almost too big for a laptop. Come on, be real! <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
you are just talking Crazy!
I don't mind the ports on the back except for the ethernet port. I find its hard to click the cable out becuase the bottom of the display is kinda in the way. I guess an airport base station would solve that.
Yes, I agree.
Give us side ports, rugged enclosure, better Airport signal strength, tray-loading Superdrive and 16"+ display.
Way to go BJNY, you just described the new Sony Vaio notebook minus airport capability...is that what we really want. I worked at a Best Buy and all my fellow employees were in awe of my Titanium and really admired the slot loading option, saying it should be on all notebooks. My titanium has been everywhere, from school, to home, in my car, and even to Europe and back. It is rugged enough to take some punishment. It's not designed to be dropped and scraped along concrete...
<strong>I agree. Leave the dislpay alone. Its awesome right now. Any bigger would be ridiculous. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes, the display size is nice for a small laptop. But I would like to see higher resolutions like 1280x1024+. My Bro bought a Dell laptop ( <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> I told him not to... MANY problems!) and the only feature I like better than my powerbook is the 1600x1200 15.1 inch screen. That screen is SHARP!
Yes, I too hope the next line of PowerBooks do include side ports like the iBook.
My only complaint now is the fact that the ports are on the left side. It would be much nicer if they were on the right. That way, my mouse cable wouldn't get in the way.
Also I would like the next line of PowerBooks to feature a display hinge like the current iBooks. I love the way the screen folds down and away. This allows the iBook to be more compact when closed and positions the display at a much better viewing angle when open. Subtle details like this are what makes the iBook design in many ways superior to the TiBook's.
New PowerBook designs should draw from the iBooks strengths. I want Apple's next pro notebook to better designed and more rugged. Then perhaps I'll pay extra for one.
It's just an inch. Sony already makes one such model. They could just make it wider without making it taller. I don't think you'd notice an inch more width.
In another thread I juggled some CPU costs and power/heat numbers and I found that it would be possible to do a DP machine (with two slightly slower CPU's) for about the same cost and energy/heat characteristics as one very fast PPC. Add a bigger battery and a extra cooling and such a machine would really only have to be about a pound heavier and a hair thicker. It is possible cause a proc has to get a lot hotter and hungrier just to get a little faster, thus 2 slightly slower CPU's can be arranged so they produce less heat (over a wider area).
I think people would buy a 1.2" thick, DP800, 6.5lbs Ti at slightly over 14" wide. The current machine is 13.4" wide, but even if the book doesn't get any taller you're still measuring screen size in diagnals, the increase in actual width would be around 3/4".
[ 08-25-2002: Message edited by: Matsu ]</p>
I'd probably compromise at 1440*900 (17" iMac), but if you look around the PC laptop market there are plenty of machines running 1600*1200 at 15" - that's where Apple should be.
15" may be the practical limit for a laptop, but 16" in a wide (or even wider) format could make a laptop that is really only about 3/4 of an inch wider than the current Ti and no taller.
<strong>I'd probably compromise at 1440*900 (17" iMac), but if you look around the PC laptop market there are plenty of machines running 1600*1200 at 15" - that's where Apple should be.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Where I work, we have a grand total of 26 Dells with those 15" 1600 x 1200 screens. Without exception, every single one runs at 10x7, most with large fonts enabled.
I'm much happier with a native resolution that most people can comfortably use than a very high resolution that forces the average person to run on a scaled screen full time - especially since LCDs aren't very good at that. If you polled the number of people who actually run those laptops at full resolution I think you'd be amazed at the size of the result.
[ 08-25-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
i guess it's okay if you have wirless or if you are left handed.