... But the sacrifice of battery life for power would not be worth it. Just my opinion. I may be alone on this one. ...
You're not alone, emig. A dual-core G4 at 1.5GHz or faster would put serious Power in the PowerBook. And hopefully not take too much out of the PocketBook. :-)
Seeing the problem is having with the G5's being shoehorned into the iMac, I don't think the G5 is an option for the PB at this point in time. I;m betting Apple will use a faster G4 or even a dual core G4.
It's mainly for the perceived role of the PowerBook. This is supposed to be the "ultimate" laptop. While it doesn't have to be the absolute fastest, nor should it lag behind x86 offerings as dramatically as it does. And Apple doesn't have the megahertz myth to blame anymore, either! The Pentium M is a very efficient chip, so much so that it almost embarasses Intel to admit that AMD/Freescale/IBM have had the right idea before they did.
Apple can manage the G5, too. The main problem with the G5 is not the power consumption of the main CPU; subsequent steppings of the 970FX have brought the power use down significantly. It's the system controller that must be dealt with. When your system controller takes up as much power as your processor does, you have a problem. If IBM could integrate the and I/O controllers into the CPU - and it's not outside the realm of possibility to do so, since AMD did it - it would not only reduce power consumption dramatically, but improve performance at the same time.
By the way, you may want to keep an eye on the ISSCC conference happening Feb. 6-10. It's strongly hinted that the Cell processor will be formally unveiled then, and the conference could easily be the venue of introduction for any other POWER or PowerPC chips - even if they're ones that only go into PowerMacs at first.
I don't care what they produce, so long as it is better than now - because spending $3000 on a notebook computer that is the same speed as my imac mini would be psycologically impalatable.
That is really the most compelling argument of why it's needed. The performance to price ratio of the different lines are too blurred. I know you sacrifice performance for portability, but the point of the powerbook line is to suffer performance compared to the Powermac, not the iMac or Mac Mini.
While I agree that the Powerbook is supposed to be the "ultimate laptop", I really don't think it needs a G5 from IBM in it. The chip is still pretty new and needs a little work.
The G4 technology from Motorola/Freescale has been around for awhile and seems to have some nice performance and less power consumption. There's nothing really wrong with using different chip technologies for different computers.
The G5 could be used for desktops and servers while the G4 could be used for laptops and the mini. The machines that need chips that can work in very small, enclosed environments without melting everything around them.
I would much rather have the new G4 Freescale chip that has a bigger bus speed and is mult-cored. This seems like this would offer a big performance boost and allows Apple to do what they always like to do...be the first to do something.
"The world's first multi-core laptop"
Unless someone else has already create a multi-core laptop?
Unless someone else has already create a multi-core laptop?
No, but I would not be surprised to see Intel there first. Intel seems already very aggressive and has talked about the future dual-core dothan chips, expected to go into production next year.
For more than a year now, the PC laptops have a significant performance advantage over the Powerbooks. There are 64-bit laptops with Athlons performing like desktops, and now the Banias and Dothans with near desktop performance but with power savings better than that of a G4. The Powerbooks now have the place that the G4 Power Macs had in 2002 and 2003: underperforming and overpriced pieces of hardware, having as only advantage the OS and the software bundle. While the software part can be of primary importance to some, it is not to others that demand high performance.
This is a Macintosh forum and almost all here we are Macintosh users, but we must face the reality: the Powerbook is not what used to be and Apple needs to do something for that.
the deal ladies and gentleman is there is a g5 pb. it may take till june to see it, but you will see it and you will drool. think pc's have caught up? not even in bill gates best wet dream. think powerbook design cant get any better? think frontside bus is a problem? you guys made need a change of underwear for this annncement. remember a mwsf how steve kept saying blueray, BlueRay, BLUERAY? and remember how he said, oh what is he said 50 times over and over? oh yeah thats right "2005 will be the year of HIGH DEFINITION!" well you can't exactly have that last statement true till you have the drives to support it, right? hmmm... so maybe the lack of updates in some of the lines... hmmm... might just have something to do with pioneer and a few others getting that technology in their hands. oh and dont expect to see g4 dual core in any of the lines. "2005 will also be the year of the g5." and dont think your gonna have a 5 minute battery life or a dell sized laptop. you wont. see after 2 1/2 years (1 1/2 publicly) of playing with the g5 they've definetly "figured it out." not only will it be smaller than bill gates uh nevermind... but it will use less energy than anything you thought g4 was capable. so wait be patient and rest assured prices on lines never go up. oh and thank you for months of enjoyment i love the posts keep it up. they're very entertaining!
wait till you see whats in store for you with powermacs! whooh its gonna be a doozy.
think pc's have caught up? not even in bill gates best wet dream.
A) Bill Gates is the boss of Microsoft, not Dell or something. Microsoft, unlike Apple, is not a desktop PC manufacturer.
"Think PC's have caught up" implies that the PC world is constantly trying to catch up with Apple, and that is where I strongly disagree with you. There is nothing wrong with the hardware of PC's, it's just different. Apple sells good products because of a combination of factors, not one:
style, appealing hardware design, unique software/OS, less variety to offer -> better control over hardware/software combinations.
C) It would be nice if you formed proper sentences and came up with a well thought out, constructive opinion.
I use both PC's and Macs, and I am getting sick of the childish "suck Bill Gates" posts. Keep an open mind, there is good/bad stuff in each platform.
A Powerbook G5 is needed. A Powerbook G4 is also needed, as well as an iBook G4 and an ultralite G4.
Why a G5? A G5 has 50% more FPU performance than a G4 at the same clock rate. Most of Apple's pro apps use a lot of FPU. A Powerbook G5 doesn't have to be a svelt 1 inch thick laptop. It would be very difficult to put into a 1 inch form factor anyways. But 1.5 inch thick? Yes, quite doable. Apple can charge $2500+ for 1.8 to 2 GHz versions.
The Powerbook G4 can be just like the updated ones today, but about $200 cheaper. Same thing with the 14" iBook.
I don't care what they produce, so long as it is better than now - because spending $3000 on a notebook computer that is the same speed as my imac mini would be psycologically impalatable.
Apple has just overcome my objections by
1. Lowering the price
2. Including more memory, which effectively further price reductions.
3. Allowing the 17" powerbook to drive the 30" monitor, which is a feature missing from my mini.
4. Including digital audio in and out, which is also missing from my mini.
I guess that since all computers are really "fast enough", price, noise level, attractiveness and feature set are what convince me to buy (not clock speed).
A Powerbook G5 is needed. A Powerbook G4 is also needed, as well as an iBook G4 and an ultralite G4.
Why a G5? A G5 has 50% more FPU performance than a G4 at the same clock rate. Most of Apple's pro apps use a lot of FPU. A Powerbook G5 doesn't have to be a svelt 1 inch thick laptop. It would be very difficult to put into a 1 inch form factor anyways. But 1.5 inch thick? Yes, quite doable. Apple can charge $2500+ for 1.8 to 2 GHz versions.
The Powerbook G4 can be just like the updated ones today, but about $200 cheaper. Same thing with the 14" iBook.
Thank you. This is it right here. All of these ARE NEEDED. Currently there needs to be a balance between portability and power.
For the user who posted about AMD 64 bit laptops. Yah they have about a 2-3 hour battery life. Just like the other "desktop performing laptops". You don't understand how much these high powered laptops are draining. I had a pentium 4 2.2ghz t41 thinkpad. I had to buy 2 ADDITIONAL batteries to keep me happy (luckily i found them on ebay for 60 a pop). It averaged about 2 hours per battery. I could squeeze another 30 min out of it if I lowered the brightness of the screen all the way down. This was unacceptable.
If I had a long plane ride before those additional batteries were purchased i was screwed. We don't need jet engines in our laptops. Quit trying to play the "jones'" routine.
But yes all of those lines are needed. Powerbook g5 for the ones that HAVE TO HAVE IT and don't care about portability / battery life. A powerbook g4 for those who are perfectly happy with what is avail right now. A iBook g4 for those who need ultimate portability.
For the user who posted about AMD 64 bit laptops. Yah they have about a 2-3 hour battery life.
Correct me if I am wrong, but I think there are plenty of Powerbook users complaining that they cannot get more than 3 hours of normal use when on battery.
Correct me if I am wrong, but I think there are plenty of Powerbook users complaining that they cannot get more than 3 hours of normal use when on battery.
It depends which size you're talking about for one. I'm not a 100% an expert on this one... but I believe the powerbook 15" is rated at 4.5-5 hours. !2" is more... 17" is less.
I think 3 hours is a bit low. I know it is because I've seen them run longer... when the original ti's came out they were running 4+ hours. I only assumed it had gotten better, especially since apple had bumped up the predicted battery life. I don't own one so I can't say for sure.
Either way, powerbooks need low wattage chips. This is the major advantage of the centrino technology... it uses so little battery life. A g5 will not be as competitive at this point as a g4.
The Pentium-M, however you want to call it, is not the greatest evolution of low-power technology by any means. When it's running all-out, it still gets really hot. The only real difference is that, like the XScale, it has many operational modes that software can pick to optimize the task at hand. As far as max performance per watt, it's hard to beat the PPC750 series. That's why the multi-core Freescale projects are so appealing. They have efficient, modern architectures (unlike the Pentium-M) as well as power-aware functionality.
im thinking on the line of mobile video/audio/photo pros that have to crunch larger and larger files, video, etc.
In my domain, ideally a video reporter will want to be able to connect a camera to laptop and then directly to a satellite uplink.
I havent tried with a G4 yet, but it will be soon when video feeds will be done directly in MPEG4 H.264 (AVC) from the broadcast area. To make it as light and efficient as possible, you're gonna want a laptop that can give you REAL TIME encoding/transcoding.
I would like to see how well a current maxed out 1.67GHz G4 with 1.5GB of ram can transcode a Firewire videoin raw DV signal to a 512kb-1mbit-1.5mbit and 2mbit MPEG4 ISO and AVC. Just in Standard Definition...
I can hardly imagine if you were to hook up that "consumer" HD camera Jobs showed off into an MPEG4 AVC 2-4-6mbit stream.
So anyway... YES we needed some serious crunching power thank you very much
On the battery life issue of the powerbook G4, my Rev C 12" has gotten about 3.5 hours out of it doing spread sheets and word processing and wireless internet.
My friend's 15" 1.7 GHz hypersonic pc Centrino laptop gets about the same battery life as mine does doing the same. His CPU scales down to below 700 MHz, which is why the battery lasts so long.
On the battery life issue of the powerbook G4, my Rev C 12" has gotten about 3.5 hours out of it doing spread sheets and word processing and wireless internet.
My friend's 15" 1.7 GHz hypersonic pc Centrino laptop gets about the same battery life as mine does doing the same. His CPU scales down to below 700 MHz, which is why the battery lasts so long.
I just got 4+ hours of life on a TiBook 15" 1GHz this weekend, doing more or less the same as you, and it's more than 2 years old. It is officially the longest running G4 powerbook. For whatever reason, the current ones have smaller batteries. I think this must have to do with the regulations on Lithium that passed not too long ago.
So if you want longer running powerbooks, vote Libertarian.
The Pro lineup should be the best you can get. Nothing worse than trying to get a job done saving files to the laptop and it's the laptop that's holding you up.
Comments
Originally posted by emig647
... But the sacrifice of battery life for power would not be worth it. Just my opinion. I may be alone on this one. ...
You're not alone, emig. A dual-core G4 at 1.5GHz or faster would put serious Power in the PowerBook. And hopefully not take too much out of the PocketBook. :-)
It's mainly for the perceived role of the PowerBook. This is supposed to be the "ultimate" laptop. While it doesn't have to be the absolute fastest, nor should it lag behind x86 offerings as dramatically as it does. And Apple doesn't have the megahertz myth to blame anymore, either! The Pentium M is a very efficient chip, so much so that it almost embarasses Intel to admit that AMD/Freescale/IBM have had the right idea before they did.
Apple can manage the G5, too. The main problem with the G5 is not the power consumption of the main CPU; subsequent steppings of the 970FX have brought the power use down significantly. It's the system controller that must be dealt with. When your system controller takes up as much power as your processor does, you have a problem. If IBM could integrate the and I/O controllers into the CPU - and it's not outside the realm of possibility to do so, since AMD did it - it would not only reduce power consumption dramatically, but improve performance at the same time.
By the way, you may want to keep an eye on the ISSCC conference happening Feb. 6-10. It's strongly hinted that the Cell processor will be formally unveiled then, and the conference could easily be the venue of introduction for any other POWER or PowerPC chips - even if they're ones that only go into PowerMacs at first.
Originally posted by e1618978
I don't care what they produce, so long as it is better than now - because spending $3000 on a notebook computer that is the same speed as my imac mini would be psycologically impalatable.
That is really the most compelling argument of why it's needed. The performance to price ratio of the different lines are too blurred. I know you sacrifice performance for portability, but the point of the powerbook line is to suffer performance compared to the Powermac, not the iMac or Mac Mini.
The G4 technology from Motorola/Freescale has been around for awhile and seems to have some nice performance and less power consumption. There's nothing really wrong with using different chip technologies for different computers.
The G5 could be used for desktops and servers while the G4 could be used for laptops and the mini. The machines that need chips that can work in very small, enclosed environments without melting everything around them.
I would much rather have the new G4 Freescale chip that has a bigger bus speed and is mult-cored. This seems like this would offer a big performance boost and allows Apple to do what they always like to do...be the first to do something.
"The world's first multi-core laptop"
Unless someone else has already create a multi-core laptop?
Of course these are just my opinions.
Mike
Originally posted by MPMoriarty
"The world's first multi-core laptop"
Unless someone else has already create a multi-core laptop?
No, but I would not be surprised to see Intel there first. Intel seems already very aggressive and has talked about the future dual-core dothan chips, expected to go into production next year.
For more than a year now, the PC laptops have a significant performance advantage over the Powerbooks. There are 64-bit laptops with Athlons performing like desktops, and now the Banias and Dothans with near desktop performance but with power savings better than that of a G4. The Powerbooks now have the place that the G4 Power Macs had in 2002 and 2003: underperforming and overpriced pieces of hardware, having as only advantage the OS and the software bundle. While the software part can be of primary importance to some, it is not to others that demand high performance.
This is a Macintosh forum and almost all here we are Macintosh users, but we must face the reality: the Powerbook is not what used to be and Apple needs to do something for that.
wait till you see whats in store for you with powermacs! whooh its gonna be a doozy.
think pc's have caught up? not even in bill gates best wet dream.
A) Bill Gates is the boss of Microsoft, not Dell or something. Microsoft, unlike Apple, is not a desktop PC manufacturer.
style, appealing hardware design, unique software/OS, less variety to offer -> better control over hardware/software combinations.
C) It would be nice if you formed proper sentences and came up with a well thought out, constructive opinion.
I use both PC's and Macs, and I am getting sick of the childish "suck Bill Gates" posts. Keep an open mind, there is good/bad stuff in each platform.
Why a G5? A G5 has 50% more FPU performance than a G4 at the same clock rate. Most of Apple's pro apps use a lot of FPU. A Powerbook G5 doesn't have to be a svelt 1 inch thick laptop. It would be very difficult to put into a 1 inch form factor anyways. But 1.5 inch thick? Yes, quite doable. Apple can charge $2500+ for 1.8 to 2 GHz versions.
The Powerbook G4 can be just like the updated ones today, but about $200 cheaper. Same thing with the 14" iBook.
Originally posted by e1618978
I don't care what they produce, so long as it is better than now - because spending $3000 on a notebook computer that is the same speed as my imac mini would be psycologically impalatable.
Apple has just overcome my objections by
1. Lowering the price
2. Including more memory, which effectively further price reductions.
3. Allowing the 17" powerbook to drive the 30" monitor, which is a feature missing from my mini.
4. Including digital audio in and out, which is also missing from my mini.
I guess that since all computers are really "fast enough", price, noise level, attractiveness and feature set are what convince me to buy (not clock speed).
Originally posted by THT
A Powerbook G5 is needed. A Powerbook G4 is also needed, as well as an iBook G4 and an ultralite G4.
Why a G5? A G5 has 50% more FPU performance than a G4 at the same clock rate. Most of Apple's pro apps use a lot of FPU. A Powerbook G5 doesn't have to be a svelt 1 inch thick laptop. It would be very difficult to put into a 1 inch form factor anyways. But 1.5 inch thick? Yes, quite doable. Apple can charge $2500+ for 1.8 to 2 GHz versions.
The Powerbook G4 can be just like the updated ones today, but about $200 cheaper. Same thing with the 14" iBook.
Thank you. This is it right here. All of these ARE NEEDED. Currently there needs to be a balance between portability and power.
For the user who posted about AMD 64 bit laptops. Yah they have about a 2-3 hour battery life. Just like the other "desktop performing laptops". You don't understand how much these high powered laptops are draining. I had a pentium 4 2.2ghz t41 thinkpad. I had to buy 2 ADDITIONAL batteries to keep me happy (luckily i found them on ebay for 60 a pop). It averaged about 2 hours per battery. I could squeeze another 30 min out of it if I lowered the brightness of the screen all the way down. This was unacceptable.
If I had a long plane ride before those additional batteries were purchased i was screwed. We don't need jet engines in our laptops. Quit trying to play the "jones'" routine.
But yes all of those lines are needed. Powerbook g5 for the ones that HAVE TO HAVE IT and don't care about portability / battery life. A powerbook g4 for those who are perfectly happy with what is avail right now. A iBook g4 for those who need ultimate portability.
That would be perfect right there.
Originally posted by emig647
For the user who posted about AMD 64 bit laptops. Yah they have about a 2-3 hour battery life.
Correct me if I am wrong, but I think there are plenty of Powerbook users complaining that they cannot get more than 3 hours of normal use when on battery.
Originally posted by PB
Correct me if I am wrong, but I think there are plenty of Powerbook users complaining that they cannot get more than 3 hours of normal use when on battery.
It depends which size you're talking about for one. I'm not a 100% an expert on this one... but I believe the powerbook 15" is rated at 4.5-5 hours. !2" is more... 17" is less.
I think 3 hours is a bit low. I know it is because I've seen them run longer... when the original ti's came out they were running 4+ hours. I only assumed it had gotten better, especially since apple had bumped up the predicted battery life. I don't own one so I can't say for sure.
Originally posted by emig647
Either way, powerbooks need low wattage chips. This is the major advantage of the centrino technology... it uses so little battery life. A g5 will not be as competitive at this point as a g4.
The Pentium-M, however you want to call it, is not the greatest evolution of low-power technology by any means. When it's running all-out, it still gets really hot. The only real difference is that, like the XScale, it has many operational modes that software can pick to optimize the task at hand. As far as max performance per watt, it's hard to beat the PPC750 series. That's why the multi-core Freescale projects are so appealing. They have efficient, modern architectures (unlike the Pentium-M) as well as power-aware functionality.
im thinking on the line of mobile video/audio/photo pros that have to crunch larger and larger files, video, etc.
In my domain, ideally a video reporter will want to be able to connect a camera to laptop and then directly to a satellite uplink.
I havent tried with a G4 yet, but it will be soon when video feeds will be done directly in MPEG4 H.264 (AVC) from the broadcast area. To make it as light and efficient as possible, you're gonna want a laptop that can give you REAL TIME encoding/transcoding.
I would like to see how well a current maxed out 1.67GHz G4 with 1.5GB of ram can transcode a Firewire videoin raw DV signal to a 512kb-1mbit-1.5mbit and 2mbit MPEG4 ISO and AVC. Just in Standard Definition...
I can hardly imagine if you were to hook up that "consumer" HD camera Jobs showed off into an MPEG4 AVC 2-4-6mbit stream.
So anyway... YES we needed some serious crunching power thank you very much
My friend's 15" 1.7 GHz hypersonic pc Centrino laptop gets about the same battery life as mine does doing the same. His CPU scales down to below 700 MHz, which is why the battery lasts so long.
Originally posted by nathan22t
HA!
I'll be munching my socks while cleaning the pig poop off my car.
Would you like to supersize those socks? And how about a chamois?
Originally posted by realitydude001
On the battery life issue of the powerbook G4, my Rev C 12" has gotten about 3.5 hours out of it doing spread sheets and word processing and wireless internet.
My friend's 15" 1.7 GHz hypersonic pc Centrino laptop gets about the same battery life as mine does doing the same. His CPU scales down to below 700 MHz, which is why the battery lasts so long.
I just got 4+ hours of life on a TiBook 15" 1GHz this weekend, doing more or less the same as you, and it's more than 2 years old. It is officially the longest running G4 powerbook. For whatever reason, the current ones have smaller batteries. I think this must have to do with the regulations on Lithium that passed not too long ago.
So if you want longer running powerbooks, vote Libertarian.
The Pro lineup should be the best you can get. Nothing worse than trying to get a job done saving files to the laptop and it's the laptop that's holding you up.
Bring it on! I hope "the next" is spot on.