Is there room for another laptop line? We have iBooks for education and general tasks, and the PowerBook for the professional level (and whoever isn't really a pro but wants the higher end). What about a laptop designed to support just about anything (the bays would help here), go about anywhere, and just be a general workhorse? Think of it as an iBook on steroids; a high-end consumer laptop. G4, bays, more ram, newer graphics card, higher resolution, etc. would be included with a price point between the iBook and PowerBook.
With desktop systems we have the eMac, iMac, and PowerMac. Perhaps the laptop line will be iBook, somenewmediaorientedBook (think digital hub), and PowerBook. Thoughts?
If it gets a superdrive, then expect a major case revision....but if no superdrive, then only internal changes.
Clearly Motorola has finally figured out how to fab G4s, they are pumping them out like nobody's business. So why not drop a GHz G4 in the Titanium? Since Wintel laptops are running at over twice that clock speed, Apple needs to do all they can.
i know this is like comparing apples to oranges (Steve would love to give us the speed demo i am sure) but why must Apple in the portibale arena play "catch-up" with the PCs. announced today is mobile 1.9GHz and 2.0GHz P4-M (equivelant to G4 max we have is 800), mobile celerons around starting around 1.33GHz (equivelant to G3 max we have is 700)....
also anohter item i thought apple would 'showcase' first is built in support for 802.11b and blutooth... but they are beat by Compaq's MultiPort, a wireless networking port that supports either 802.11b or Bluetooth.
with the recent patent drawings and usual rumors i am hoping we are all pleasantly surprise come MWNY in a few weeks......
You have to remember that the word "mobility" in one of intel's processor names means "slower than the real thing"
Anyway, I would hope that the new PowerBooks have speeds up to around 200 Mhz less than the high-end PowerMac, so the new PowerBooks could go up to 1.0, 1.2, or 1.4 ghz, depending on whose rumors you want to believe.
One thing is for certain - Moto is having no trouble making 1Ghz G4s. It's time to up the ante.
dual 1.6 Ghz PowerMacs would actually look respectable, even if they can't get true DDR and have to use the Xserve hack. The improved cache architecture and improvements in Jaguar (like QE) will offset many of the limitations of the FSB bottleneck.
DDR is only going to add 10% to the speed, so who cares. A 166 Mhz MPX bus would be faster and better. MPX already utilizes more bus on throughput than equivalent existing Intel. So DDR can bite it, I'd take 166 MPX. The only reason people keep talking about DDR is that Intel uses it. Apple ain't gotta (and shouldn't) follow Intel machines. If you want DDR get an X86 and run WindogXP. Get over it.
Well, thanks for that charming post, despite the fact that I said it doesn't matter if they can't use true DDR.
166 would be nice, but Moto only said they "might" go to 166 in the future, so I didn't want to speculate on any of that.
And geez, you are an *******.
Anyways, DDR would help on memory transfers that do not go through the FSB, such as memory to video card transfers over AGP (which QE will use plenty of) or transfers from ethernet to hard drive, hard drive to RAM, etc.It certainly wouldn't hurt.
<strong>Well, thanks for that charming post, despite the fact that I said it doesn't matter if they can't use true DDR.
166 would be nice, but Moto only said they "might" go to 166 in the future, so I didn't want to speculate on any of that.
And geez, you are an *******.
Anyways, DDR would help on memory transfers that do not go through the FSB, such as memory to video card transfers over AGP (which QE will use plenty of) or transfers from ethernet to hard drive, hard drive to RAM, etc.It certainly wouldn't hurt.
Not really an *******. Just really getting tired of people saying that Apple has to have DDR are they ain't going to use macs anymore, or they suck, or blah, blah blah. DDR is not the only answer, the Gr has to be fixed to use more bandwidth. If this means DDR then fine, but DDR ain't all its suppose to be. People think that DDR is twice the speed because things are suppose to be sent on every half clock cycle, but that don't make it twice as fast.
<strong>The only reason people keep talking about DDR is that Intel uses it. Apple ain't gotta (and shouldn't) follow Intel machines. If you want DDR get an X86 and run WindogXP. Get over it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Your logic (and memory) is a**-backwards. Actually, DDR was being discussed long before Intel's support of it. Remeber a little thing called Rambus? That was Intel's buddy to back, not DDR. DDR has proven itself time and time again (and that is the reason Intel finally made the switch). And the reason I think most Mac users want it in the next systems is because it has become the new standard in in memory. And things that are standard are usually cheaper and more plentiful. I never want to go back to those day of paying outrageous amounts for RAM because only one or two companies made it.
Any news on price changes for the Powerbooks, education or otherwise? The only evidence we had to take this thread to 100+ posts was some bookstore price reductions, right? Does anything else suggest end-of-life on these machines?
Not really an *******. Just really getting tired of people saying that Apple has to have DDR are they ain't going to use macs anymore, or they suck, or blah, blah blah.
[quote]DDR is only going to add 10% to the speed, so who cares<hr></blockquote>
On what is that founded? x86 performance with DDR? It's ten percent I'd rather have anyway
MPX may be highly efficient, but it still supplies less overall bandwidth than Athlon and P4 frontside buses. "Intel uses it" is not the only reason people talk about DDR.
I have not heard of <a href="http://www.slaptech.com/index.php#powerbook"; target="_blank">Slaptech</a> until now but here is what they have to say about the next PowerBook G4:
[quote]
Apple Executive Sports 1 GHz PowerBook G4 Prototype
June 25, 2002, 06:10PM PT
Apple Computer will not release a new model of their award winning PowerBook G4 until later this fall, but company executives were seen toying with prototypes of the new model just last week.
The unit is enclosed inside the same titanium casing as the current PowerBook G4 but sports a 1 GHz G4 processor, according to an overseas source who was able to catch a glimpse of the prototype's statistical info panel. Most impressively, however, is that the prototype is said to sport double the amount of DDR SDRAM video memory as the current model, in the form of an 64MB ATI Mobility Radeon 7500 AGP graphics processor.
Little to no additional information is available on the product at this time. The sighting took place at a high-profile Apple Event last week between the computer maker and some of their most cherished digital media customers. A number of the company's America based executives were apparently flown out to the event, which took place overseas.
<strong>he he. Bodhi is brining back memories of myself in "Mercury Rising". and we all know how that turned out <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
ummm, I dont know how that turned out.... I wasnt around here when that debate happened... I heard it mentioned before, and I'm sure someone has explained it before, but i cant seem to rememebr it... anyone care to enlighten me?
Well while this thread has kind of Petered out over the last week, news came that Apple probablyh won't released a revised Titanium until the fall. Bodhi: Given the latest news article, are you still sure about revisions at MWNY?
The liklihood of PowerBook updates at the upcoming MacWorld is very low at this point. Should you wait, however? Yes.
I have read about iBooks with G4's. I tend to have a different interpretation of this rumor. I believe we'll see smaller PowerBook G4s.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You know I considered waiting, but I decided (and was helped in this decision by a partial insider) that the current PBG4 is great and I'll be using it for years anyhow, so why not get one while you can get a cheaper iPod as well? So i ordered on today. Yay.
--Alexis
P.S. Will I be annoyed if the PB recieves and update? Of course, but not angry. I've got a great machine and it'll pay off for college and years to come.
Comments
With desktop systems we have the eMac, iMac, and PowerMac. Perhaps the laptop line will be iBook, somenewmediaorientedBook (think digital hub), and PowerBook. Thoughts?
<strong>
Sounds like they're onto solving the problem with oil rubbing off the keys and onto the displays?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
The PowerBook G4 already has these bumpers.
800 MHz, 1 GHz G4
DDR RAM
Superdrive, 50% possibility
If it gets a superdrive, then expect a major case revision....but if no superdrive, then only internal changes.
Clearly Motorola has finally figured out how to fab G4s, they are pumping them out like nobody's business. So why not drop a GHz G4 in the Titanium? Since Wintel laptops are running at over twice that clock speed, Apple needs to do all they can.
I agree though, looks like Motorola has learnt how to fab.
Superdrive is iffy, wouldn't we see tray-loading laptop superdrives before slot-loading (like every other drive)??
Barto
also anohter item i thought apple would 'showcase' first is built in support for 802.11b and blutooth... but they are beat by Compaq's MultiPort, a wireless networking port that supports either 802.11b or Bluetooth.
with the recent patent drawings and usual rumors i am hoping we are all pleasantly surprise come MWNY in a few weeks......
Anyway, I would hope that the new PowerBooks have speeds up to around 200 Mhz less than the high-end PowerMac, so the new PowerBooks could go up to 1.0, 1.2, or 1.4 ghz, depending on whose rumors you want to believe.
One thing is for certain - Moto is having no trouble making 1Ghz G4s. It's time to up the ante.
dual 1.6 Ghz PowerMacs would actually look respectable, even if they can't get true DDR and have to use the Xserve hack. The improved cache architecture and improvements in Jaguar (like QE) will offset many of the limitations of the FSB bottleneck.
[ 06-24-2002: Message edited by: rogue27 ]</p>
166 would be nice, but Moto only said they "might" go to 166 in the future, so I didn't want to speculate on any of that.
And geez, you are an *******.
Anyways, DDR would help on memory transfers that do not go through the FSB, such as memory to video card transfers over AGP (which QE will use plenty of) or transfers from ethernet to hard drive, hard drive to RAM, etc.It certainly wouldn't hurt.
[ 06-24-2002: Message edited by: rogue27 ]</p>
<strong>Well, thanks for that charming post, despite the fact that I said it doesn't matter if they can't use true DDR.
166 would be nice, but Moto only said they "might" go to 166 in the future, so I didn't want to speculate on any of that.
And geez, you are an *******.
Anyways, DDR would help on memory transfers that do not go through the FSB, such as memory to video card transfers over AGP (which QE will use plenty of) or transfers from ethernet to hard drive, hard drive to RAM, etc.It certainly wouldn't hurt.
[ 06-24-2002: Message edited by: rogue27 ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Not really an *******. Just really getting tired of people saying that Apple has to have DDR are they ain't going to use macs anymore, or they suck, or blah, blah blah. DDR is not the only answer, the Gr has to be fixed to use more bandwidth. If this means DDR then fine, but DDR ain't all its suppose to be. People think that DDR is twice the speed because things are suppose to be sent on every half clock cycle, but that don't make it twice as fast.
<strong>The only reason people keep talking about DDR is that Intel uses it. Apple ain't gotta (and shouldn't) follow Intel machines. If you want DDR get an X86 and run WindogXP. Get over it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Your logic (and memory) is a**-backwards. Actually, DDR was being discussed long before Intel's support of it. Remeber a little thing called Rambus? That was Intel's buddy to back, not DDR. DDR has proven itself time and time again (and that is the reason Intel finally made the switch). And the reason I think most Mac users want it in the next systems is because it has become the new standard in in memory. And things that are standard are usually cheaper and more plentiful. I never want to go back to those day of paying outrageous amounts for RAM because only one or two companies made it.
Regards,
Pete
<strong>
Not really an *******. Just really getting tired of people saying that Apple has to have DDR are they ain't going to use macs anymore, or they suck, or blah, blah blah.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I never said that.
On what is that founded? x86 performance with DDR? It's ten percent I'd rather have anyway
MPX may be highly efficient, but it still supplies less overall bandwidth than Athlon and P4 frontside buses. "Intel uses it" is not the only reason people talk about DDR.
[quote]
Apple Executive Sports 1 GHz PowerBook G4 Prototype
June 25, 2002, 06:10PM PT
Apple Computer will not release a new model of their award winning PowerBook G4 until later this fall, but company executives were seen toying with prototypes of the new model just last week.
The unit is enclosed inside the same titanium casing as the current PowerBook G4 but sports a 1 GHz G4 processor, according to an overseas source who was able to catch a glimpse of the prototype's statistical info panel. Most impressively, however, is that the prototype is said to sport double the amount of DDR SDRAM video memory as the current model, in the form of an 64MB ATI Mobility Radeon 7500 AGP graphics processor.
Little to no additional information is available on the product at this time. The sighting took place at a high-profile Apple Event last week between the computer maker and some of their most cherished digital media customers. A number of the company's America based executives were apparently flown out to the event, which took place overseas.
<hr></blockquote>
<strong>he he. Bodhi is brining back memories of myself in "Mercury Rising". and we all know how that turned out <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
ummm, I dont know how that turned out.... I wasnt around here when that debate happened... I heard it mentioned before, and I'm sure someone has explained it before, but i cant seem to rememebr it... anyone care to enlighten me?
Edit: also, when is seybold?
[ 06-29-2002: Message edited by: Paul ]</p>
<strong>mm2002,
The liklihood of PowerBook updates at the upcoming MacWorld is very low at this point. Should you wait, however? Yes.
I have read about iBooks with G4's. I tend to have a different interpretation of this rumor. I believe we'll see smaller PowerBook G4s.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You know I considered waiting, but I decided (and was helped in this decision by a partial insider) that the current PBG4 is great and I'll be using it for years anyhow, so why not get one while you can get a cheaper iPod as well? So i ordered on today. Yay.
--Alexis
P.S. Will I be annoyed if the PB recieves and update? Of course, but not angry. I've got a great machine and it'll pay off for college and years to come.