I didn't say it did. It's an additional material property.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolchak
All metals have to be alloyed for structual use. You don't use iron, you use steel. You use 3-2.5 titanium, not CP titanium (although Apple reportedly used CP for the original Powerbook G4 Titanium). Aluminum alloys are used mostly because pure aluminum has much lower strength.
Raleigh used CP titanium in it's Dynatech frames in the 90s, with bonded magnesium lugs (IIRC). Aluminium alloys aren't just used to increase strength over pure Aluminium. Alloying it with other metals tweaks particular traits such as it's fatigue resistance. Pure aluminium has no fatigue resistance as well as being less strong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolchak
Resistance to permanent deformation has to do with the elastic limit, not stiffness. A spring or Slinky toy isn't made of stiff material, but it's designed to not exceed the steel's yield strength unless you really stretch it out or bend it too far, so it returns to its original shape.
Yes, plastic deformation is related to the elastic limit of a material. A Slinky is a good example of why steel is better than aluminium in this regard since steel, which is stiffer than aluminium at a given size, will spring back to shape when an aluminium slinky will not. Plastic defamation happens much sooner in aluminium alloys than steel, or you can use much thinner coils in a slinky in steel or thinner casing in a laptop.
On an another aside, it just amazes me people buy titanium springs to replace steel ones.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolchak
A useless property for a laptop enclosure, since you can't weld every square inch of it. Besides, many framebuilders do still use gussets on 853 frames.
Yes, I was just stating it. I can't think of any framebuilders who know what they are doing, using 853 with gussets. There's a few using 853 with lugs but the tubeset is different for lugged v welded.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolchak
It also rusts, so it will need to be protected with durable paint or more likely epoxy powder coat, both of which will reduce heat dissipation. The PB G4 Ti was painted and was fairly easy to scratch.
See 953.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolchak
I'd depend a little less on the claims coming out of press releases and bike magazines.
Dunno, I've been riding more these days than writing in bike magazines. I like it that way - I don't have to ride the shit we had in for review and have to think up a 1000 words to say so.
I think you guys are missing boat if you think this is all about one very thin notebook. I think there will be several MacBook announcements a month from today at Macworld. I think there will be the aluminized MacBook completing Apple's transition away from polycarbonate plastic. I think there will be the MacBook Pro updates with design modifications, specifically revolving around the keyboard and the trackpad. And finally, I think the "one more thing" will be the MacBook thin. That's my gut sense of what's going to happen. Apple has used many Macworlds to announce new notebooks — the Titanium PowerBook G4, the 12- and 17-inch aluminum PowerBook, and the MacBook Pro were all announced in January at Macworld. Things are looking good in this regard.
Maybe aluminium MacBooks and titanium pros? I agree with your points.
That all depends on the approach that Apple takes.
I'm not trying to discount your need to upgrade but do need to point out that disk drives, at least of the portable nature, are not that reliable. Far more laptop drives are replaced due to a failure of some sort than the need to upgrade.
That is one consideration but in the case of built in SSD you have to realize that every time the "drive" goes bad you effectively upgrade the whole computer. A solder in drive that is. When the cost of the "drive" is a significant component of the overall cost of the machine it becomes not such a bad deal. I don't see apple offering logic board upgrades but maybe as Apple care replacements.
The other end of the spectrum is that Apple or ASUS should be able to get the costs of these devices down to the point where replacement of the whole unit makes sense upon failure. Its the old question of does it make sense to spend $100 on a $300 computer that is three years old. Some will of course say yes but others will look at what that $100 will contribute to in a new machine. The same issue arises in the Pod market. many people with 3 year old iPods must be looking at the new tech. with some interest these days.
Thanks
Dave
SSD's don't fail like other drives and are much more reliable that hard drives. There are no moving parts. An flash chip might have bit faults which are are handled internally. If we're talking about a very thin laptop the chips will almost certainly be soldered into motherboard, but they will have about the same failure rate as other chips on the board, so it's much of a muchness.
I am really puzzled by the post suggesting that steel/ aluminium are stiffer than carbon fibre. Is this why modern aircraft are made of composites rather than steel or aluminium? I think not. In a stressed skin structure like an aircraft wing or a laptop case a composite will beat steel or al. every time. You also have to differentiate between strength or stiffness (two different properties) per unit weight or per unit area. Per unit weight wood ( God's Composite) comes out remarkably well but is not the best material for a computer case because the volume you need would be too big, though a nice varnished or oiled wood laptop would look great. I have had several titanium/ al. powerbooks and they were all really too delicate, they scratch, they dent and if you or your five year old sit on them you can bend them irretrievably. Part of the reason is that the frames are spot welded into the case and to do this you cannot use a proper hard grade of heat treated aluminium because the spot welding destroys the heat treated properties locally. As for the green argument about the recyclability of carbon fibre composites, there's much more carbon fibre in a tennis racquet than in a laptop case and I don't hear much support for us having steel racquets! I vote for carbon fibre every time and if it really needs a metal panel for heat transfer, then a nice bonded in copper or aluminium panel would do just fine
I am really puzzled by the post suggesting that steel/ aluminium are stiffer than carbon fibre. Is this why modern aircraft are made of composites rather than steel or aluminium? I think not.
There are numerous material properties to consider in choosing a material. There are many different ways to measure strength. It can be compression, tension, shear, hardness, brittleness, and probably others that I can't remember. Carbon fiber composites does have its strength to weight advantages over other materials, but it's kind of floppy in flat sheet form. The rackets you speak of have a constant curve to them, tubular and all.
Quote:
Part of the reason is that the frames are spot welded into the case and to do this you cannot use a proper hard grade of heat treated aluminium because the spot welding destroys the heat treated properties locally.
Can't the whole frame be re-treated? I don't do bikes, but the temper of the alloy that I use can be lost to heat in welding, but it comes back over time, in a matter of weeks at room temperature.
I am really puzzled by the post suggesting that steel/ aluminium are stiffer than carbon fibre.
I never said aluminium was stiffer, but steel is stiffer than most carbon fibre as a material. As a structure, particularly bike frames, quite often the opposite.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isidore
Is this why modern aircraft are made of composites rather than steel or aluminium?
No, that's because carbon fiber is less dense than either of them for it's strength and you can also alter the characteristics of how it flexes in the layup providing flexibility in some areas and not in others. You're also not so bothered about thickness in a wing, whereas you are in a sub-notebook. A stiff wing would do a plane no good. The wings flex up and down by quite some distance, even the aluminium ones, which confuses most people who have a simplistic view of aluminium.
I rode an Ibis Riply mountain bike a while back which has a short suspension sprung back end with no pivots, just an aluminium flat plate chainstay that flexes up and down a couple of inches. Designed by an aircraft engineer. I was sceptical but it rode well and didn't fail me despite some persuasion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isidore
As for the green argument about the recyclability of carbon fibre composites, there's much more carbon fibre in a tennis racquet than in a laptop case and I don't hear much support for us having steel racquets! I vote for carbon fibre every time and if it really needs a metal panel for heat transfer, then a nice bonded in copper or aluminium panel would do just fine
Recycleability is the end of life. What's more concerning with CF is the beginning of life, manufacture and it's expected lifespan. Dig out a copy of Cradle to Cradle by McDonough and Braungart sometime.
Steel isn't a good material for tennis racquets. That doesn't mean it's not a good material for other structures.
It would make sense from a thermal standpoint. The aluminum may be almost a necessity if they shaved off thickness and increased speed.
I very much agree. It makes sense from a thermal standpoint, and as for the delineation, if they make the Macbook Pro gunmetal and the Macbook brushed Al and keep the 13.3 inch displays, I do not foresee any problems!
I think you guys are missing boat if you think this is all about one very thin notebook. I think there will be several MacBook announcements a month from today at Macworld. I think there will be the aluminized MacBook completing Apple's transition away from polycarbonate plastic. I think there will be the MacBook Pro updates with design modifications, specifically revolving around the keyboard and the trackpad. And finally, I think the "one more thing" will be the MacBook thin. That's my gut sense of what's going to happen. Apple has used many Macworlds to announce new notebooks ? the Titanium PowerBook G4, the 12- and 17-inch aluminum PowerBook, and the MacBook Pro were all announced in January at Macworld. Things are looking good in this regard.
I am with you on the transition from poly to metal. And I am also with you on the idea that this MWSF is going to be HUGE for the notebook line. I agree with you on the redesign of the Macbook Pro. The only thing that I do not agree with the the "Macbook thin". I could see Apple unveiling a new, small FULL FEATURED Macbook Pro, but I don't see it being it's own product or having it's own name. I think that if they add a new Macbook, it will be a new, small pro and they will drop the Black Macbook model and have just the 2 Macbook models. That's how I see it...
A brand new MacBook that I ordered for my wife was just delivered an hour ago. I'm setting it up now. I don't want to hear about new MacBooks since they were just recently updated to Santa Rosa. Whatever slim 13.3" notebook is being seen now will be a new MacBook Pro, not a MacBook. The MBP line is due for a major update which includes a new case design and Penryn chips. The existing MBP/PB design has been around since 2003. I got my 15" PB in September, 2003, and I want a new MBP with a new case and Penryn. Please, let that be introduced on Jan 15.
[CENTER] [/CENTER][CENTER]If they do make the MBP 13 inch they would loose a lot of sales they need a 15 inch [/CENTER][CENTER][/CENTER]
Having followed Apple very closely from an investor research standpoint, it seems pretty clear to me that it is careful to sequence the launch of all its products so that it achieves two objectives:
1. Has interestng new products every 3-4 months (2007 saw iPhone, MBP evolutions, new iPods, Leopard and MB evolutions)
2. Doesn't alienate anyone who just bought a new machine
I suspect that the big hardware story at Macworld will be a revamped MacBook Pro line-up. Both 17 inch and 15-inch models will become thinner and lighter with new keyboards and internal DVD drives (and possibly BlueRay option). A third model will be added, which is the much anticipated ultralight 13-inch model with flash memory and no internal drive. All MBPs will have LED screens and 80211n WiFi.
I think that Apple will migrate its MacBook line-up to anodized aluminum models later in the year. They will also become thinner and lighter, but will ratain a 13.3-inch screen and an internal DVD drive. With any luck, they'll be available in bright colours like the iPod Nano.
A lot of people have debated whether Apple would create a single laptop line-up. I think it needs 13-inch models both with and without internal DVD drives, because a good reason to have a DVD drive to watch movies when travellling and it will take time before downloadable movies replace DVDs.
Having followed Apple very closely from an investor research standpoint, it seems pretty clear to me that it is careful to sequence the launch of all its products so that it achieves two objectives:
1. Has interestng new products every 3-4 months (2007 saw iPhone, MBP evolutions, new iPods, Leopard and MB evolutions)
2. Doesn't alienate anyone who just bought a new machine
I suspect that the big hardware story at Macworld will be a revamped MacBook Pro line-up. Both 17 inch and 15-inch models will become thinner and lighter with new keyboards and internal DVD drives (and possibly BlueRay option). A third model will be added, which is the much anticipated ultralight 13-inch model with flash memory and no internal drive. All MBPs will have LED screens and 80211n WiFi.
I think that Apple will migrate its MacBook line-up to anodized aluminum models later in the year. They will also become thinner and lighter, but will ratain a 13.3-inch screen and an internal DVD drive. With any luck, they'll be available in bright colours like the iPod Nano.
A lot of people have debated whether Apple would create a single laptop line-up. I think it needs 13-inch models both with and without internal DVD drives, because a good reason to have a DVD drive to watch movies when travellling and it will take time before downloadable movies replace DVDs.
[CENTER]That Would Be Preaty Cool If They Made The MacBook And MacBook Pro In Colors[/CENTER]
SSD's don't fail like other drives and are much more reliable that hard drives. There are no moving parts. An flash chip might have bit faults which are are handled internally. If we're talking about a very thin laptop the chips will almost certainly be soldered into motherboard, but they will have about the same failure rate as other chips on the board, so it's much of a muchness.
Vulnerability to certain types of effects, including abrupt power loss (especially DRAM based SSDs), magnetic fields and electric/static charges compared to normal HDDs (which store the data inside a Faraday cage).
Quote:
Limited write cycles. Typical Flash storage will typically wear out after 300,000-500,000 write cycles, while high endurance Flash storage is often marketed with endurance of 1?5 million write cycles (many log files, file allocation tables, and other commonly used parts of the file system exceed this over the lifetime of a computer). Special file systems or firmware designs can mitigate this problem by spreading writes over the entire device, rather than rewriting files in place.
Their read/write times are generally slower than a HDD, at least at this level of development. They are an interesting trend, and logically the technology involved should improve over time.
Comments
Strength has nothing to do with stiffness.
I didn't say it did. It's an additional material property.
All metals have to be alloyed for structual use. You don't use iron, you use steel. You use 3-2.5 titanium, not CP titanium (although Apple reportedly used CP for the original Powerbook G4 Titanium). Aluminum alloys are used mostly because pure aluminum has much lower strength.
Raleigh used CP titanium in it's Dynatech frames in the 90s, with bonded magnesium lugs (IIRC). Aluminium alloys aren't just used to increase strength over pure Aluminium. Alloying it with other metals tweaks particular traits such as it's fatigue resistance. Pure aluminium has no fatigue resistance as well as being less strong.
Resistance to permanent deformation has to do with the elastic limit, not stiffness. A spring or Slinky toy isn't made of stiff material, but it's designed to not exceed the steel's yield strength unless you really stretch it out or bend it too far, so it returns to its original shape.
Yes, plastic deformation is related to the elastic limit of a material. A Slinky is a good example of why steel is better than aluminium in this regard since steel, which is stiffer than aluminium at a given size, will spring back to shape when an aluminium slinky will not. Plastic defamation happens much sooner in aluminium alloys than steel, or you can use much thinner coils in a slinky in steel or thinner casing in a laptop.
On an another aside, it just amazes me people buy titanium springs to replace steel ones.
A useless property for a laptop enclosure, since you can't weld every square inch of it. Besides, many framebuilders do still use gussets on 853 frames.
Yes, I was just stating it. I can't think of any framebuilders who know what they are doing, using 853 with gussets. There's a few using 853 with lugs but the tubeset is different for lugged v welded.
It also rusts, so it will need to be protected with durable paint or more likely epoxy powder coat, both of which will reduce heat dissipation. The PB G4 Ti was painted and was fairly easy to scratch.
See 953.
I'd depend a little less on the claims coming out of press releases and bike magazines.
Dunno, I've been riding more these days than writing in bike magazines. I like it that way - I don't have to ride the shit we had in for review and have to think up a 1000 words to say so.
I think you guys are missing boat if you think this is all about one very thin notebook. I think there will be several MacBook announcements a month from today at Macworld. I think there will be the aluminized MacBook completing Apple's transition away from polycarbonate plastic. I think there will be the MacBook Pro updates with design modifications, specifically revolving around the keyboard and the trackpad. And finally, I think the "one more thing" will be the MacBook thin. That's my gut sense of what's going to happen. Apple has used many Macworlds to announce new notebooks — the Titanium PowerBook G4, the 12- and 17-inch aluminum PowerBook, and the MacBook Pro were all announced in January at Macworld. Things are looking good in this regard.
Maybe aluminium MacBooks and titanium pros? I agree with your points.
That all depends on the approach that Apple takes.
I'm not trying to discount your need to upgrade but do need to point out that disk drives, at least of the portable nature, are not that reliable. Far more laptop drives are replaced due to a failure of some sort than the need to upgrade.
That is one consideration but in the case of built in SSD you have to realize that every time the "drive" goes bad you effectively upgrade the whole computer. A solder in drive that is. When the cost of the "drive" is a significant component of the overall cost of the machine it becomes not such a bad deal. I don't see apple offering logic board upgrades but maybe as Apple care replacements.
The other end of the spectrum is that Apple or ASUS should be able to get the costs of these devices down to the point where replacement of the whole unit makes sense upon failure. Its the old question of does it make sense to spend $100 on a $300 computer that is three years old. Some will of course say yes but others will look at what that $100 will contribute to in a new machine. The same issue arises in the Pod market. many people with 3 year old iPods must be looking at the new tech. with some interest these days.
Thanks
Dave
SSD's don't fail like other drives and are much more reliable that hard drives. There are no moving parts. An flash chip might have bit faults which are are handled internally. If we're talking about a very thin laptop the chips will almost certainly be soldered into motherboard, but they will have about the same failure rate as other chips on the board, so it's much of a muchness.
I am really puzzled by the post suggesting that steel/ aluminium are stiffer than carbon fibre. Is this why modern aircraft are made of composites rather than steel or aluminium? I think not.
There are numerous material properties to consider in choosing a material. There are many different ways to measure strength. It can be compression, tension, shear, hardness, brittleness, and probably others that I can't remember. Carbon fiber composites does have its strength to weight advantages over other materials, but it's kind of floppy in flat sheet form. The rackets you speak of have a constant curve to them, tubular and all.
Part of the reason is that the frames are spot welded into the case and to do this you cannot use a proper hard grade of heat treated aluminium because the spot welding destroys the heat treated properties locally.
Can't the whole frame be re-treated? I don't do bikes, but the temper of the alloy that I use can be lost to heat in welding, but it comes back over time, in a matter of weeks at room temperature.
I am really puzzled by the post suggesting that steel/ aluminium are stiffer than carbon fibre.
I never said aluminium was stiffer, but steel is stiffer than most carbon fibre as a material. As a structure, particularly bike frames, quite often the opposite.
Is this why modern aircraft are made of composites rather than steel or aluminium?
No, that's because carbon fiber is less dense than either of them for it's strength and you can also alter the characteristics of how it flexes in the layup providing flexibility in some areas and not in others. You're also not so bothered about thickness in a wing, whereas you are in a sub-notebook. A stiff wing would do a plane no good. The wings flex up and down by quite some distance, even the aluminium ones, which confuses most people who have a simplistic view of aluminium.
I rode an Ibis Riply mountain bike a while back which has a short suspension sprung back end with no pivots, just an aluminium flat plate chainstay that flexes up and down a couple of inches. Designed by an aircraft engineer. I was sceptical but it rode well and didn't fail me despite some persuasion.
As for the green argument about the recyclability of carbon fibre composites, there's much more carbon fibre in a tennis racquet than in a laptop case and I don't hear much support for us having steel racquets! I vote for carbon fibre every time and if it really needs a metal panel for heat transfer, then a nice bonded in copper or aluminium panel would do just fine
Recycleability is the end of life. What's more concerning with CF is the beginning of life, manufacture and it's expected lifespan. Dig out a copy of Cradle to Cradle by McDonough and Braungart sometime.
Steel isn't a good material for tennis racquets. That doesn't mean it's not a good material for other structures.
I don't hear much support for us having steel racquets!
Jimmy Connors won several grand slams with one.........
Do you think that the Mac Book Pro update might get delayed due to the debut of MB thin at the MacWorld ?
Any Comments ??
http://whygetmacbookpro.blogspot.com/
Switching from Windows right after Steve's keynote at the MWSF 'Jan 08
me too, my brother in arms
It would make sense from a thermal standpoint. The aluminum may be almost a necessity if they shaved off thickness and increased speed.
I very much agree. It makes sense from a thermal standpoint, and as for the delineation, if they make the Macbook Pro gunmetal and the Macbook brushed Al and keep the 13.3 inch displays, I do not foresee any problems!
I think you guys are missing boat if you think this is all about one very thin notebook. I think there will be several MacBook announcements a month from today at Macworld. I think there will be the aluminized MacBook completing Apple's transition away from polycarbonate plastic. I think there will be the MacBook Pro updates with design modifications, specifically revolving around the keyboard and the trackpad. And finally, I think the "one more thing" will be the MacBook thin. That's my gut sense of what's going to happen. Apple has used many Macworlds to announce new notebooks ? the Titanium PowerBook G4, the 12- and 17-inch aluminum PowerBook, and the MacBook Pro were all announced in January at Macworld. Things are looking good in this regard.
I am with you on the transition from poly to metal. And I am also with you on the idea that this MWSF is going to be HUGE for the notebook line. I agree with you on the redesign of the Macbook Pro. The only thing that I do not agree with the the "Macbook thin". I could see Apple unveiling a new, small FULL FEATURED Macbook Pro, but I don't see it being it's own product or having it's own name. I think that if they add a new Macbook, it will be a new, small pro and they will drop the Black Macbook model and have just the 2 Macbook models. That's how I see it...
A brand new MacBook that I ordered for my wife was just delivered an hour ago. I'm setting it up now. I don't want to hear about new MacBooks since they were just recently updated to Santa Rosa. Whatever slim 13.3" notebook is being seen now will be a new MacBook Pro, not a MacBook. The MBP line is due for a major update which includes a new case design and Penryn chips. The existing MBP/PB design has been around since 2003. I got my 15" PB in September, 2003, and I want a new MBP with a new case and Penryn. Please, let that be introduced on Jan 15.
[CENTER]
I don't think it would be exclusive as in eliminating other sizes. Apple used to have a pro 12", along with 14"/15" and 17" models.
1. Has interestng new products every 3-4 months (2007 saw iPhone, MBP evolutions, new iPods, Leopard and MB evolutions)
2. Doesn't alienate anyone who just bought a new machine
I suspect that the big hardware story at Macworld will be a revamped MacBook Pro line-up. Both 17 inch and 15-inch models will become thinner and lighter with new keyboards and internal DVD drives (and possibly BlueRay option). A third model will be added, which is the much anticipated ultralight 13-inch model with flash memory and no internal drive. All MBPs will have LED screens and 80211n WiFi.
I think that Apple will migrate its MacBook line-up to anodized aluminum models later in the year. They will also become thinner and lighter, but will ratain a 13.3-inch screen and an internal DVD drive. With any luck, they'll be available in bright colours like the iPod Nano.
A lot of people have debated whether Apple would create a single laptop line-up. I think it needs 13-inch models both with and without internal DVD drives, because a good reason to have a DVD drive to watch movies when travellling and it will take time before downloadable movies replace DVDs.
Having followed Apple very closely from an investor research standpoint, it seems pretty clear to me that it is careful to sequence the launch of all its products so that it achieves two objectives:
1. Has interestng new products every 3-4 months (2007 saw iPhone, MBP evolutions, new iPods, Leopard and MB evolutions)
2. Doesn't alienate anyone who just bought a new machine
I suspect that the big hardware story at Macworld will be a revamped MacBook Pro line-up. Both 17 inch and 15-inch models will become thinner and lighter with new keyboards and internal DVD drives (and possibly BlueRay option). A third model will be added, which is the much anticipated ultralight 13-inch model with flash memory and no internal drive. All MBPs will have LED screens and 80211n WiFi.
I think that Apple will migrate its MacBook line-up to anodized aluminum models later in the year. They will also become thinner and lighter, but will ratain a 13.3-inch screen and an internal DVD drive. With any luck, they'll be available in bright colours like the iPod Nano.
A lot of people have debated whether Apple would create a single laptop line-up. I think it needs 13-inch models both with and without internal DVD drives, because a good reason to have a DVD drive to watch movies when travellling and it will take time before downloadable movies replace DVDs.
[CENTER]That Would Be Preaty Cool If They Made The MacBook And MacBook Pro In Colors[/CENTER]
SSD's don't fail like other drives and are much more reliable that hard drives. There are no moving parts. An flash chip might have bit faults which are are handled internally. If we're talking about a very thin laptop the chips will almost certainly be soldered into motherboard, but they will have about the same failure rate as other chips on the board, so it's much of a muchness.
That's not entirely correct.
Vulnerability to certain types of effects, including abrupt power loss (especially DRAM based SSDs), magnetic fields and electric/static charges compared to normal HDDs (which store the data inside a Faraday cage).
Limited write cycles. Typical Flash storage will typically wear out after 300,000-500,000 write cycles, while high endurance Flash storage is often marketed with endurance of 1?5 million write cycles (many log files, file allocation tables, and other commonly used parts of the file system exceed this over the lifetime of a computer). Special file systems or firmware designs can mitigate this problem by spreading writes over the entire device, rather than rewriting files in place.
Their read/write times are generally slower than a HDD, at least at this level of development. They are an interesting trend, and logically the technology involved should improve over time.