I have an iBook 500 combo and a Pismo 400. I find that in OS 9 the iBook is noticeably faster but in OS X the Pismo wipes the floor with the iBook. IE scroll speed on the iBook is atrocious. Although it could be because the Pismo has 640 MB of ram and the iBook only has 256. Still I think Apple needs to do some serious work to get OS X running faster on G3s in general. As much as I want a new dual 1GHz or new iMac OS X should really be performing much better on my own machines. It is definitely tolerable on my Pismo. I use it 100% of the time, but the iBook is a bit frustrating.
However I love the iBook. The small size is absolutely amazing. It fits so well into my back pack. I wouldn't ever throw my pismo in there the same way. I had an old iBook and while I wouldn't hesitate to throw that thing around I never wanted to carry the thing anywhere because it was so heavy. I really hope Apple keeps the 12.1 iBook until some point where they can make an even SMALLER iBook.
<strong>Who thinks that having 2 pro portables muddies anything?!?!?! This is one of the dumbest perceptions that still lives in the cerebral cortices of many pseudo-marketing geniuses on these boards.</strong><hr></blockquote>
As long as there are clear differences between the different models, along with a clear target market for each of them, I see nothing wrong with more choice.
[quote]<strong>That being said, I don't think a 12" Ti makes alot of sense, but what about a 10" pro subnotebook?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Many of us (including MacGregor and neutrino23) have discussed the possibility of a 10" sub-PowerBook at great length in the two original "2400 dreams" threads on the old AI and a third <a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=000014"; target="_blank"> 3 lbs sub-PowerBook</a> thread on the new (current) AI boards. After using my 12" iBook for over nine months, I simply couldn't go back to my old PowerBook 2400's 10.4" 800x600 screen. In my opinion, a 1024x768 11.2" screen would be a perfect compromise.
<strong>Escher, I was hoping you would have commented (past pluperfect?) on a subnotebook Tibook.</strong><hr></blockquote>
MacGregor: I didn't have time to read the whole thread and comment on everything yesterday. Even though I have lost some of my fervor, the subnotebook TiBook has not been lost on me. I just had to dig a bit deeper than the 12" iBook I'm typing this on.
In general, as I said above, I think that a 10.4" screen would be too small, even for a subnotebook. With OS X's dock taking up a good chunk of space at the bottom of the screen (I refuse to hide a genuinely useful interface element), 1024x768 is the minimum resolution. There are 1024 screens at the 10.4" size point (many of them in Sony VAIOs), but I think they push the ppi too high. That is why I would advocate an 11.2" 1024 screen: more readable but still physically small enough.
In summary, my ideal laptop, which continues to be a real subnotebook, would look like this: 11.2" 1024 screen, Sahara G3/1Ghz or Apollo G4/700 or its portable equivalent (whichever is cooler), NO optical drive, 5 hour battery (at 0.5 brightness, not 0.05 brightness like the iBook), and all the ruggedness of the current iBook.
I reckon that my dream subnotebook would weigh ca. 3.5 lbs (1.6 kg) instead of the traditional 3 lbs (1.4 kg) subnotebook because of the good battery and ruggedness. My rationale is that I would rather carry a rugged 3.5 lbs subnotebook with 5 hour battery than a 3 lbs subnotebook (with only a 1 hour battery), a 0.5 lbs AC adapter and a 0.5 lbs protective case.
In addition to the above, my dream subnotebook would not be complete without a Duo-style docking station. I picture this dock like a vertical-drop mailbox for my sub-PowerBook that I could mount to the side of my desk.
[quote]Originally posted by waffffffle:
<strong>I really hope Apple keeps the 12.1 iBook until some point where they can make an even SMALLER iBook.</strong><hr></blockquote>
WOULDN'T APPLE HAVE TO TAKE OUT THE OPTICAL DRIVE IN ORDER TO BUILD A TIBOOK AND 1"???
if you think about it, since the pb is much thinner than the ibook, there might not be enough room for an optil drive. if you got a ti, just imagine how much space it would take up. my guess it would be from the front right corner to the option key ont he ither side of the keyboard and from the front right corner back to the power button.
if that is what the size would be, then the optical drive would dominate the laptop. i would guess that they'd need to take out the optical drive in order to have room for everything else.
the question is, do people like having a separate optical drive? and sony notebook users out there have any opinion??
<strong>do people like having a separate optical drive? and sony notebook users out there have any opinion??</strong><hr></blockquote>
The answer is easy. Drop the damn optical drive, and bundle a <a href="http://www.mcetech.com/lucid.html"; target="_blank">Lucid portable FireWire 16x CD-RW</a> from MCE with the sub-PowerBook.
At least for me, a built-in optical drive is dead weight. I only use the CD-ROM to install software, which happens about three or four times a year. I rarely burn CDs, and never need to do so when on the road. At home I have a fast external FireWire burner anyway.
<strong>iBook still isn't durable enough for education.
the original was. that's why my mother's district won't let her use any of her hardware money to buy iBooks. they can't withstand their "desk fall rule". In other words, dropping the old iBook 3 feet resulted in little to no damage while dropping the new ones results in numerous problems most notably the screen popping out</strong><hr></blockquote>
Wow - Further proof that the ice iBooks can't take a damn.
I miss the lively subnotebook discussion we used to have in the 2400 dreams thread.
I havn't followed development of Sony's VAIO subnotebook line in recent months, but recently had a new look at the <a href="http://www.sonystyle.com/vaio/"; target="_blank">Sony VAIO website</a>. Even though I argued above that an 11.3" 4 lbs 'Book without optical drive would be perfect, I still find myself liking Sony's <a href="http://www.sonystyle.com/vaio/picturebook/index.shtml"; target="_blank">Picturebook</a>. Personally, I have no use for a built-in camera (at least for now) and would much rather have built in WiFi (AirPort) support. But the tiny form factor is ultimately portable and battery life seems to have been improved. The 8.9" UWSXGA (1280x600) TFT screen is quite small, but if I have a desktop at home it's just fine for my needs. My only remaining concern is the quirky arrangement of keys on the keyboard. If only Sony could fix that.
So how about an Apple Picturebook running a streamlined version of OS X? Or maybe something closer to the Newton OS?
The answer is easy. Drop the damn optical drive, and bundle a <a href="http://www.mcetech.com/lucid.html"; target="_blank">Lucid portable FireWire 16x CD-RW</a> from MCE with the sub-PowerBook.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That's a sweet little CDRW, but I would be very surprised if Apple leaned on a third party to offer basic out-of-the-box functionality.
Also, if Apple makes the drive built-in, they can pretty much guarantee that its drivers will be 100% compatible with the rest of the system and (Apple) applications. The price for being able to choose whichever external optical drive you want is that Apple has to go and figure out which port the drive's in and whether it has working drivers - all in firmware. You don't want a needed reinstall to be thwarted because some conflict prevents your FW CDRW from mounting a boot disk.
Alternately, they could ship an optical drive that attachs via a Wierd Custom Port(TM), so that neither the bus nor the drive mechanism is a problem.
What I'm imagining is something like this: An iBook, essentially, mashed into the thinnest, lightest form that is practicable and wrapped in titanium (or something like it). This is a travel companion, not a workstation, so portability and battery life are more important than performance and display capabilities. So, the motherboard would be, specs-wise, equivalent to that of the high-end iBook, with a HD borrowed from the TiBook. The laptop would have iBook-style video out, mirroring only, so that the graphics card can be cool and efficient. Much attention would be paid to making sure the laptop was cool and quiet. The battery would be especially dense (and expensive) so that, in combination with the parsimonious motherboard, the laptop could approach an 8 hour battery life. Weight would be just under 3.5 pounds. Cost, about $2000 - $2500.
I bought with my own money both my PowerMac 9500 180/MP, and PowerMac G4/400 and now once again I will buying with my own money either an iMac or a DP G4 when they meet what I want.</strong><hr></blockquote>
if some people around here spent as much time learning about BSD (and optimization), or even simple maintenance/performance issues, they wouldn't be bitching about poor performance on an iBook.
I don't personally have an iBook, but i've spent a lot of time working on my friend's, and i love it. (it's a 500MHz/256MB) Also, I have a beige tower (300MHz, 256MB) running 10.1 and though it's not as fast as my TiBook (400), it's acceptable for most of what i do (including photoshop 6 in classic). of course, i spent some amount of time tweaking to get the most out of it. but WTF, isn't that half the fun? or are there an overwhelming number of AI'ers looking to turn back into sheep?
if some people around here spent as much time learning about BSD (and optimization), or even simple maintenance/performance issues, they wouldn't be bitching about poor performance on an iBook.
I don't personally have an iBook, but i've spent a lot of time working on my friend's, and i love it. (it's a 500MHz/256MB) Also, I have a beige tower (300MHz, 256MB) running 10.1 and though it's not as fast as my TiBook (400), it's acceptable for most of what i do (including photoshop 6 in classic). of course, i spent some amount of time tweaking to get the most out of it. but WTF, isn't that half the fun? or are there an overwhelming number of AI'ers looking to turn back into sheep?
sorry I don't fully understand your post. Are you saying that iBook users should have to go into the command line and do other things just to get good performance? and learn BSD?
Seeing as the 1.8"(?) hard drives of the iPod are soon to reach 20-30 GB in capacity (by summer, I hear)- why couldn't such a drive be used in a new, 12" 1152x768 widescreen miniTi?
Think of it this way. The ultra-small drive, Li-Polymer battery (integrated into casing such as iPod), titanium casing, 1" form factor, just shrunk to 3/4 size. You might even be able to fit an optical drive in there - but that would increase weight...so a nice, aesthetically matching Apple DVD-CDRW drive would come standard, which would attach to the machine via FireWire(2?)
Therefore, with the widescreen, you'd have a veritable differentiation between the iBook line and this 'mini-Ti'
The exceptionally efficient Sahara chip (@ 1 GHz or so) would seem perfect for such an application.
That, and the new battery technology would seem to give this model battery life of 8+ hours...
The ultimate portable.
Of course, the normal 15.2 Ti would gain 1600x resolution at this point, and the 14.1 iBook gaining 1280x resolution at the same time...
sorry I don't fully understand your post.</strong><hr></blockquote>
why doesn't that surprise me?!
no, the point is that iBook performance is great for 99% of the target market. and for the 1% 'true nerds' who might actually need a little more performance, it can be had by tweaking. (since a 1%'er should know how to do that anyway...)
but clearly, this is waste of time, since mommy bought you a PB.......
so why do you spend time trying to convince others that an iBook sucks? trying to prove how much bigger your PenisBook is?
Escher: You brought up the EXACT point AND example that I was going to make in answer to your reply to me...I think that makes sense.
One of my best friends has that Sony Picture Book. He has been a Mac guy most of his life (as an educator), but now he works for NASA and needed a wintel. I have played with it; it is great and is the only windows computer I would buy. It is wonderful and collects accolades in ways that usually only Macs get. It is light weight and even looks and feels like something Apple would come up with. We took it on a bike ride from Cancun to Belize with tiny digital video cameras taped to our helmets that were sending video signals by radio to a camera. With a digital still camera we uploaded photos to a website from cybercafes along the way. It was great, but I kept thinking how much more elegant the whole thing would have been with a subnotebook TiBook and iMovie, etc.
Every one of us on the trip were Mac people, but we couldn't deny that the Apple had nothing to offer in that size. And what gets under my craw is that I bet Apple has a subnotebook like that already somewhere in a basement, but can't afford (or rather thinks it can't afford) to market it.
And when I suggested (earlier in this thread) that the subnotebook evolve from TiBook DNA rather than iBook DNA, it was the PictureBook that formed my opinion. Optical drives are almost by definition not necessary for a subnotebook and the thin Ti form with an iPod-like battery and microdrives.
[quote]why doesn't that surprise me?!<hr></blockquote>
because you can't write?
[quote]
no, the point is that iBook performance is great for 99% of the target market. and for the 1% 'true nerds' who might actually need a little more performance, it can be had by tweaking. (since a 1%'er should know how to do that anyway...)
<hr></blockquote>
uh... the fact that the GUI is unresponsive, QT playback of full screen video suffers, and several other performance issues is not just for the 1% of "true nerds".
And even if it is suitable for many which I'm sure it is there IS a good portion of potential buyers who have the conception, whether it is correct or wrong, that OS X is sluggish on G3 based systems.
That's not good and I must say I agree with them. All of apple's iApps and the OS itself are finetuned to the G4. It's ridiculous to have a product without the G4 anymore. It's 2002. Not 1997.
[quote]
but clearly, this is waste of time, since mommy bought you a PB.......
so why do you spend time trying to convince others that an iBook sucks? trying to prove how much bigger your PenisBook is?<hr></blockquote>
Comments
it's a no win so far.
However I love the iBook. The small size is absolutely amazing. It fits so well into my back pack. I wouldn't ever throw my pismo in there the same way. I had an old iBook and while I wouldn't hesitate to throw that thing around I never wanted to carry the thing anywhere because it was so heavy. I really hope Apple keeps the 12.1 iBook until some point where they can make an even SMALLER iBook.
<strong>Who thinks that having 2 pro portables muddies anything?!?!?! This is one of the dumbest perceptions that still lives in the cerebral cortices of many pseudo-marketing geniuses on these boards.</strong><hr></blockquote>
As long as there are clear differences between the different models, along with a clear target market for each of them, I see nothing wrong with more choice.
[quote]<strong>That being said, I don't think a 12" Ti makes alot of sense, but what about a 10" pro subnotebook?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Many of us (including MacGregor and neutrino23) have discussed the possibility of a 10" sub-PowerBook at great length in the two original "2400 dreams" threads on the old AI and a third <a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=000014"; target="_blank"> 3 lbs sub-PowerBook</a> thread on the new (current) AI boards. After using my 12" iBook for over nine months, I simply couldn't go back to my old PowerBook 2400's 10.4" 800x600 screen. In my opinion, a 1024x768 11.2" screen would be a perfect compromise.
Escher
[ 02-19-2002: Message edited by: Escher ]</p>
<strong>Escher, I was hoping you would have commented (past pluperfect?) on a subnotebook Tibook.</strong><hr></blockquote>
MacGregor: I didn't have time to read the whole thread and comment on everything yesterday. Even though I have lost some of my fervor, the subnotebook TiBook has not been lost on me. I just had to dig a bit deeper than the 12" iBook I'm typing this on.
In general, as I said above, I think that a 10.4" screen would be too small, even for a subnotebook. With OS X's dock taking up a good chunk of space at the bottom of the screen (I refuse to hide a genuinely useful interface element), 1024x768 is the minimum resolution. There are 1024 screens at the 10.4" size point (many of them in Sony VAIOs), but I think they push the ppi too high. That is why I would advocate an 11.2" 1024 screen: more readable but still physically small enough.
In summary, my ideal laptop, which continues to be a real subnotebook, would look like this: 11.2" 1024 screen, Sahara G3/1Ghz or Apollo G4/700 or its portable equivalent (whichever is cooler), NO optical drive, 5 hour battery (at 0.5 brightness, not 0.05 brightness like the iBook), and all the ruggedness of the current iBook.
I reckon that my dream subnotebook would weigh ca. 3.5 lbs (1.6 kg) instead of the traditional 3 lbs (1.4 kg) subnotebook because of the good battery and ruggedness. My rationale is that I would rather carry a rugged 3.5 lbs subnotebook with 5 hour battery than a 3 lbs subnotebook (with only a 1 hour battery), a 0.5 lbs AC adapter and a 0.5 lbs protective case.
In addition to the above, my dream subnotebook would not be complete without a Duo-style docking station. I picture this dock like a vertical-drop mailbox for my sub-PowerBook that I could mount to the side of my desk.
[quote]Originally posted by waffffffle:
<strong>I really hope Apple keeps the 12.1 iBook until some point where they can make an even SMALLER iBook.</strong><hr></blockquote>
My feelings exactly, waffffffle.
Escher
[ 02-19-2002: Message edited by: Escher ]</p>
WOULDN'T APPLE HAVE TO TAKE OUT THE OPTICAL DRIVE IN ORDER TO BUILD A TIBOOK AND 1"???
if you think about it, since the pb is much thinner than the ibook, there might not be enough room for an optil drive. if you got a ti, just imagine how much space it would take up. my guess it would be from the front right corner to the option key ont he ither side of the keyboard and from the front right corner back to the power button.
if that is what the size would be, then the optical drive would dominate the laptop. i would guess that they'd need to take out the optical drive in order to have room for everything else.
the question is, do people like having a separate optical drive? and sony notebook users out there have any opinion??
<strong>do people like having a separate optical drive? and sony notebook users out there have any opinion??</strong><hr></blockquote>
The answer is easy. Drop the damn optical drive, and bundle a <a href="http://www.mcetech.com/lucid.html"; target="_blank">Lucid portable FireWire 16x CD-RW</a> from MCE with the sub-PowerBook.
At least for me, a built-in optical drive is dead weight. I only use the CD-ROM to install software, which happens about three or four times a year. I rarely burn CDs, and never need to do so when on the road. At home I have a fast external FireWire burner anyway.
Escher
<strong>Yes, but then you loose the affordability advantage in the accedemic model which needs to be a certain size.
it's a no win so far.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I would hope that the 12" G4 "iBook" would cost similarily to today's models.
<strong>iBook still isn't durable enough for education.
the original was. that's why my mother's district won't let her use any of her hardware money to buy iBooks. they can't withstand their "desk fall rule". In other words, dropping the old iBook 3 feet resulted in little to no damage while dropping the new ones results in numerous problems most notably the screen popping out</strong><hr></blockquote>
Wow - Further proof that the ice iBooks can't take a damn.
I havn't followed development of Sony's VAIO subnotebook line in recent months, but recently had a new look at the <a href="http://www.sonystyle.com/vaio/"; target="_blank">Sony VAIO website</a>. Even though I argued above that an 11.3" 4 lbs 'Book without optical drive would be perfect, I still find myself liking Sony's <a href="http://www.sonystyle.com/vaio/picturebook/index.shtml"; target="_blank">Picturebook</a>. Personally, I have no use for a built-in camera (at least for now) and would much rather have built in WiFi (AirPort) support. But the tiny form factor is ultimately portable and battery life seems to have been improved. The 8.9" UWSXGA (1280x600) TFT screen is quite small, but if I have a desktop at home it's just fine for my needs. My only remaining concern is the quirky arrangement of keys on the keyboard. If only Sony could fix that.
So how about an Apple Picturebook running a streamlined version of OS X? Or maybe something closer to the Newton OS?
Escher
<strong>
The answer is easy. Drop the damn optical drive, and bundle a <a href="http://www.mcetech.com/lucid.html"; target="_blank">Lucid portable FireWire 16x CD-RW</a> from MCE with the sub-PowerBook.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That's a sweet little CDRW, but I would be very surprised if Apple leaned on a third party to offer basic out-of-the-box functionality.
Also, if Apple makes the drive built-in, they can pretty much guarantee that its drivers will be 100% compatible with the rest of the system and (Apple) applications. The price for being able to choose whichever external optical drive you want is that Apple has to go and figure out which port the drive's in and whether it has working drivers - all in firmware. You don't want a needed reinstall to be thwarted because some conflict prevents your FW CDRW from mounting a boot disk.
Alternately, they could ship an optical drive that attachs via a Wierd Custom Port(TM), so that neither the bus nor the drive mechanism is a problem.
What I'm imagining is something like this: An iBook, essentially, mashed into the thinnest, lightest form that is practicable and wrapped in titanium (or something like it). This is a travel companion, not a workstation, so portability and battery life are more important than performance and display capabilities. So, the motherboard would be, specs-wise, equivalent to that of the high-end iBook, with a HD borrowed from the TiBook. The laptop would have iBook-style video out, mirroring only, so that the graphics card can be cool and efficient. Much attention would be paid to making sure the laptop was cool and quiet. The battery would be especially dense (and expensive) so that, in combination with the parsimonious motherboard, the laptop could approach an 8 hour battery life. Weight would be just under 3.5 pounds. Cost, about $2000 - $2500.
How's that?
<strong>I miss the lively subnotebook discussion we used to have in the 2400 dreams thread.
Escher</strong><hr></blockquote>
This thread is almost like old times. In a few more weeks we can go to MWT and hope once again for an ultralight PB.
<strong>
perhaps because it is her computer
I bought with my own money both my PowerMac 9500 180/MP, and PowerMac G4/400 and now once again I will buying with my own money either an iMac or a DP G4 when they meet what I want.</strong><hr></blockquote>
if some people around here spent as much time learning about BSD (and optimization), or even simple maintenance/performance issues, they wouldn't be bitching about poor performance on an iBook.
I don't personally have an iBook, but i've spent a lot of time working on my friend's, and i love it. (it's a 500MHz/256MB) Also, I have a beige tower (300MHz, 256MB) running 10.1 and though it's not as fast as my TiBook (400), it's acceptable for most of what i do (including photoshop 6 in classic). of course, i spent some amount of time tweaking to get the most out of it. but WTF, isn't that half the fun? or are there an overwhelming number of AI'ers looking to turn back into sheep?
[ 02-26-2002: Message edited by: concentricity ]</p>
<strong>
if some people around here spent as much time learning about BSD (and optimization), or even simple maintenance/performance issues, they wouldn't be bitching about poor performance on an iBook.
I don't personally have an iBook, but i've spent a lot of time working on my friend's, and i love it. (it's a 500MHz/256MB) Also, I have a beige tower (300MHz, 256MB) running 10.1 and though it's not as fast as my TiBook (400), it's acceptable for most of what i do (including photoshop 6 in classic). of course, i spent some amount of time tweaking to get the most out of it. but WTF, isn't that half the fun? or are there an overwhelming number of AI'ers looking to turn back into sheep?
[ 02-26-2002: Message edited by: concentricity ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
sorry I don't fully understand your post. Are you saying that iBook users should have to go into the command line and do other things just to get good performance? and learn BSD?
I think you miss the point of the mac.
Seeing as the 1.8"(?) hard drives of the iPod are soon to reach 20-30 GB in capacity (by summer, I hear)- why couldn't such a drive be used in a new, 12" 1152x768 widescreen miniTi?
Think of it this way. The ultra-small drive, Li-Polymer battery (integrated into casing such as iPod), titanium casing, 1" form factor, just shrunk to 3/4 size. You might even be able to fit an optical drive in there - but that would increase weight...so a nice, aesthetically matching Apple DVD-CDRW drive would come standard, which would attach to the machine via FireWire(2?)
Therefore, with the widescreen, you'd have a veritable differentiation between the iBook line and this 'mini-Ti'
The exceptionally efficient Sahara chip (@ 1 GHz or so) would seem perfect for such an application.
That, and the new battery technology would seem to give this model battery life of 8+ hours...
The ultimate portable.
Of course, the normal 15.2 Ti would gain 1600x resolution at this point, and the 14.1 iBook gaining 1280x resolution at the same time...
So, portable product matrix would look as such.
iBook 12" 1024x768 G4 800 MHZ 100 MHZ bus
Radeon 7500 Mobility 16 MB
CD-RW 1299 Combo 1499
iBook 14" 1280x960 G4 900 MHZ 100 MHZ bus
Radeon 7500 Mobility 16 MB
Combo 1699
Titanium PowerBook Duo 13" 1152x768 G4 933 MHZ
Radeon 7500 Mobility 16 MB 133 MHZ bus
External Combo 1999, with DuoDock 2499
Titanium PowerBook 15" 1600x960 G4 1 GHZ 1.13 GHZ 133 MHZ bus
Radeon 7500 Mobility 32 MB
Combo 2499 SuperDrive 2999
howzat?
<strong>
sorry I don't fully understand your post.</strong><hr></blockquote>
why doesn't that surprise me?!
no, the point is that iBook performance is great for 99% of the target market. and for the 1% 'true nerds' who might actually need a little more performance, it can be had by tweaking. (since a 1%'er should know how to do that anyway...)
but clearly, this is waste of time, since mommy bought you a PB.......
so why do you spend time trying to convince others that an iBook sucks? trying to prove how much bigger your PenisBook is?
(my apologies to Jonathan and others)
One of my best friends has that Sony Picture Book. He has been a Mac guy most of his life (as an educator), but now he works for NASA and needed a wintel. I have played with it; it is great and is the only windows computer I would buy. It is wonderful and collects accolades in ways that usually only Macs get. It is light weight and even looks and feels like something Apple would come up with. We took it on a bike ride from Cancun to Belize with tiny digital video cameras taped to our helmets that were sending video signals by radio to a camera. With a digital still camera we uploaded photos to a website from cybercafes along the way. It was great, but I kept thinking how much more elegant the whole thing would have been with a subnotebook TiBook and iMovie, etc.
Every one of us on the trip were Mac people, but we couldn't deny that the Apple had nothing to offer in that size. And what gets under my craw is that I bet Apple has a subnotebook like that already somewhere in a basement, but can't afford (or rather thinks it can't afford) to market it.
And when I suggested (earlier in this thread) that the subnotebook evolve from TiBook DNA rather than iBook DNA, it was the PictureBook that formed my opinion. Optical drives are almost by definition not necessary for a subnotebook and the thin Ti form with an iPod-like battery and microdrives.
So it is time to start a new thread, Escher.
because you can't write?
[quote]
no, the point is that iBook performance is great for 99% of the target market. and for the 1% 'true nerds' who might actually need a little more performance, it can be had by tweaking. (since a 1%'er should know how to do that anyway...)
<hr></blockquote>
uh... the fact that the GUI is unresponsive, QT playback of full screen video suffers, and several other performance issues is not just for the 1% of "true nerds".
And even if it is suitable for many which I'm sure it is there IS a good portion of potential buyers who have the conception, whether it is correct or wrong, that OS X is sluggish on G3 based systems.
That's not good and I must say I agree with them. All of apple's iApps and the OS itself are finetuned to the G4. It's ridiculous to have a product without the G4 anymore. It's 2002. Not 1997.
[quote]
but clearly, this is waste of time, since mommy bought you a PB.......
so why do you spend time trying to convince others that an iBook sucks? trying to prove how much bigger your PenisBook is?<hr></blockquote>
mature