With all of the issues on the latest 15" PB (white spots, latches) and even the 800 and 900 iBook (logic board problems), anybody want to take a guess as to any quality control problems that will arise? I'm a bit hesitant to be first in line for one of the defective machines.
As noted by a few folks, the fact that the Apple Tech Specs page for the iBook nowhere mentions the velocity engine is damn odd. It's trumpeted in the Tech pages for every other product.
If the iBooks are using the 7455 G4 at 1GHz, how are they dissipating the heat? It was my understanding that getting that chip to work in the 12" PBook was not possible due to the heat, even with an aluminum shell. You're telling me that they have suddenly been able to get it to work in the iBook?
I'm just hypothesizing, but Apple might be using the IBM 750 FX w/o the velocity engine and calling it a G4. Maybe just as a stopgap until the 750 GX is ready?
It's official the G3 is dead. Apple won't use the 750 gx.
Now all Apple's computer run altivec. This is a great new for more altivec optimisation, even in the OS.
I am not so sure that I agree with this statement. Apple would use a 750gx if it provided a higher GHz than G4's, if it provided a better bus than the G4, if it cost less than the G4, or if it consumed vastly less power than the G4 and still had Altivec. There are still some potentially compelling reasons to use the 750fx. Besides, if Apple wants to ditch Moto completely, then they are going to need a G4 replacement that is not a 970 so that they can differentiate their products.
I think that there is still a good chance that the next iBook revision will not have a Motorola CPU but will support Altivec and it sure won't be a G5.
Its a 7455 without the ext L3 cache. Don't you think that Moto now has a few of these lying around and at a pretty low price.
G4 in an iBook at a low price--for the masses. If you want bleeding edge get a G5.
Otherwise known as a 7445. Full AltiVec engine, no L3 cache support, 256K L2 cache (running at full processor speed). All on-chip caches run at full processor speed, it is the off-chip L3 that runs at a fractional rate (or L2 back in the days of off-chip L2).
These look like sweet machines. If I didn't have all my money busy doing other things right now, I'd pick one up. Still might in 6 months or so.
[BI'm just hypothesizing, but Apple might be using the IBM 750 FX w/o the velocity engine and calling it a G4. Maybe just as a stopgap until the 750 GX is ready?[/B]
That's an interesting hypothesis, but 1) the FX has 512 L2 cache, not 256, and 2) they really couldn't do that, because the 750FX IS a G3. It's the chip that was in the previous iBook G3. Did they just start calling it a G3 for the heck of it? No, I don't think so. Altivec is a necessary and defining feature of the G4.
I'm just hypothesizing, but Apple might be using the IBM 750 FX w/o the velocity engine and calling it a G4. Maybe just as a stopgap until the 750 GX is ready?
No, that would be a legal disaster for Apple. You can't redefine what G4 means without facing a horrible class action suit from consumers who thought that well, they were getting a G4 in their iBooks. There is NO way that a 650fx is in the current iBook and Apple is just calling it a G4.
I'm still baffled why Apple still offers the 14" iBook with the same # of pixels as the 12". They don't say it on the tech specs (XGA?) but I'm assuming they're both still 1024x768.. which is fine for the 12" but crappy for the 14". They really should increase the res. a little bit on those things.
I'm still baffled why Apple still offers the 14" iBook with the same # of pixels as the 12". They don't say it on the tech specs (XGA?) but I'm assuming they're both still 1024x768.. which is fine for the 12" but crappy for the 14". They really should increase the res. a little bit on those things.
XGA means 1024x768. There are a number of definitions like that:
VGA = 640x480
SVGA = 800x600
XGA = 1024x768
SXGA = 1280x1024
SXGA+ = 1400x1050
UXGA = 1600x1200
WXGA = 1366x768 (according to Dictionary.com although I've also seen this used to describe 1280x800 resolution)
WSXGA = 1440x900
WSXGA+ = 1680x1050
WUXGA = 1920x1200
Anyway, it would be nice if they put an 1152x864 screen on the 14" iBook. It would be weird to have a screen resolution higher than the 15" PowerBook (something like 1280x960 vs. the PowerBook's 1280x854), but an 1152x864 screen would be just what the 14" iBook needs to earn some respect from the Mac community. Sure, computer-illiterate consumers see the 14" screen as an advantage, but someone in the know will realize that if the resolutions are the same, the larger screen only hurts mobility.
No, that would be a legal disaster for Apple. You can't redefine what G4 means without facing a horrible class action suit from consumers who thought that well, they were getting a G4 in their iBooks. There is NO way that a 650fx is in the current iBook and Apple is just calling it a G4.
I would be the first to agree, but at the moment I can't rectify the two issues raised:
Why would Apple ignore the addition of the velocity engine to the iBook? That might well be the single biggest gain in this upgrade.
Klaus, from MacParts.de/iBook spanning hack fame had this to say
Quote:
i obviously can´t say for sure if it will still work since they were just released today and i doubt anybody has one yet. i´m pretty sure though that the hack will still work since apple didn´t try to disable it with other recently introduced macs (emac, imac).
i think the radeon 9200 will be faster than the geforce used in the new 12" powerbook. this was the case already with the radeon 7500 in the g3 ibook compared to the older geforce chip in the first 12" powerbook model. however, the current powerbooks all offer dvi which is important if you want to use an apple display.
usually i receive feedback quickly after a new revision is available and i will post information on my website as soon as it´s save to make a statement.
there are only two reasons why the hack might not work: either the chip only supports one display (this is highly unlikely since all modern chips support 2 displays). the other reason would be a change in the driver architecture (this would most likely happen solely to make it harder to patch) but i dont think apple will do this. there´s tons of people who don´t know about the patch and thus would buy a powerbook or who wouldn´t want to take the risk (which - as you know - is minimal).
so once the first ones ship and somebody tries it, we'll get confirmation.
until then the presumption is that some form of the Spanning Hack should still work
A consolidation of all the major differences I could think of between the $US1599 1GHz 12" PowerBook and the $US1099 800 MHz G4 iBook:
12" G4 PowerBook advantagesFaster by 200 MHz. Double L2 cache (512K vs. 256K). 10 GB more drive space (40GB vs 30GB). More expandable memory (1152MB vs. 640MB) -- expandable without throwing 128MB away in order to add more memory. DVI video. Better video card (NVIDIA GeForce FX Go5200 vs. ATI Mobility Radeon 9200, both 32 MB). Monitor spanning Bluetooth included. Midrange-enhancing third speaker. Analog audio input. Smaller (0.17" thinner, 0.3" narrower, 0.5" less deep). Lighter (by 0.3 lb., 4.6 lb. vs. 4.9 lb.) Nicer looking Aluminum case (although that's subjective), with perhaps better heat dissipation. (I'd imagine the iBook's fan might run a bit more often to get rid of heat that isn't shed as easily through a plastic shell). 12" G4 iBook advantages$US500 cheaper. Perhaps more rugged than the PowerBook. One more hour of rated battery usage (6 vs.5), with a slightly more capacious battery (50 watt hours vs. 47).
I've owned a 12' ibook before i sold and upgraded to a 12' powerbook, and you're completely forgetting the wonderful keyboard on the Al powerbook!! it's awesome...
DVI out and analog input i think are huge differences...but i think this iBook is a strong update from Apple...
* 256MB of SDRAM (128MB built in and 128MB in SO-DIMM slot)
* 384MB of SDRAM (128MB built in and 256MB in SO-DIMM slot)
* 640MB of SDRAM (128MB built in and 512MB in SO-DIMM slot)
# One open SO-DIMM slot; support for up to 1.25GB
The tech spec part implies that there are TWO so-dimm slots, Im interested to here what others think about it. I know that the tech specs have been wrong before.
I also note that the powerplug is on the right hand side, which is a real shame. It really prevents the possibility of building a dock for the iBook.
Comments
http://www.macopinion.com/columns/ro.../21/index.html
As noted by a few folks, the fact that the Apple Tech Specs page for the iBook nowhere mentions the velocity engine is damn odd. It's trumpeted in the Tech pages for every other product.
If the iBooks are using the 7455 G4 at 1GHz, how are they dissipating the heat? It was my understanding that getting that chip to work in the 12" PBook was not possible due to the heat, even with an aluminum shell. You're telling me that they have suddenly been able to get it to work in the iBook?
I'm just hypothesizing, but Apple might be using the IBM 750 FX w/o the velocity engine and calling it a G4. Maybe just as a stopgap until the 750 GX is ready?
It's all rather curious.
Originally posted by Powerdoc
It's official the G3 is dead. Apple won't use the 750 gx.
Now all Apple's computer run altivec. This is a great new for more altivec optimisation, even in the OS.
I am not so sure that I agree with this statement. Apple would use a 750gx if it provided a higher GHz than G4's, if it provided a better bus than the G4, if it cost less than the G4, or if it consumed vastly less power than the G4 and still had Altivec. There are still some potentially compelling reasons to use the 750fx. Besides, if Apple wants to ditch Moto completely, then they are going to need a G4 replacement that is not a 970 so that they can differentiate their products.
I think that there is still a good chance that the next iBook revision will not have a Motorola CPU but will support Altivec and it sure won't be a G5.
Originally posted by cowerd
Its a 7455 without the ext L3 cache. Don't you think that Moto now has a few of these lying around and at a pretty low price.
G4 in an iBook at a low price--for the masses. If you want bleeding edge get a G5.
Otherwise known as a 7445. Full AltiVec engine, no L3 cache support, 256K L2 cache (running at full processor speed). All on-chip caches run at full processor speed, it is the off-chip L3 that runs at a fractional rate (or L2 back in the days of off-chip L2).
These look like sweet machines. If I didn't have all my money busy doing other things right now, I'd pick one up. Still might in 6 months or so.
Originally posted by neumac
[BI'm just hypothesizing, but Apple might be using the IBM 750 FX w/o the velocity engine and calling it a G4. Maybe just as a stopgap until the 750 GX is ready?[/B]
That's an interesting hypothesis, but 1) the FX has 512 L2 cache, not 256, and 2) they really couldn't do that, because the 750FX IS a G3. It's the chip that was in the previous iBook G3. Did they just start calling it a G3 for the heck of it? No, I don't think so. Altivec is a necessary and defining feature of the G4.
Originally posted by neumac
I'm just hypothesizing, but Apple might be using the IBM 750 FX w/o the velocity engine and calling it a G4. Maybe just as a stopgap until the 750 GX is ready?
No, that would be a legal disaster for Apple. You can't redefine what G4 means without facing a horrible class action suit from consumers who thought that well, they were getting a G4 in their iBooks. There is NO way that a 650fx is in the current iBook and Apple is just calling it a G4.
Originally posted by eVo
I'm still baffled why Apple still offers the 14" iBook with the same # of pixels as the 12". They don't say it on the tech specs (XGA?) but I'm assuming they're both still 1024x768.. which is fine for the 12" but crappy for the 14". They really should increase the res. a little bit on those things.
with you all the wey on that one eVo
VGA = 640x480
SVGA = 800x600
XGA = 1024x768
SXGA = 1280x1024
SXGA+ = 1400x1050
UXGA = 1600x1200
WXGA = 1366x768 (according to Dictionary.com although I've also seen this used to describe 1280x800 resolution)
WSXGA = 1440x900
WSXGA+ = 1680x1050
WUXGA = 1920x1200
Anyway, it would be nice if they put an 1152x864 screen on the 14" iBook. It would be weird to have a screen resolution higher than the 15" PowerBook (something like 1280x960 vs. the PowerBook's 1280x854), but an 1152x864 screen would be just what the 14" iBook needs to earn some respect from the Mac community. Sure, computer-illiterate consumers see the 14" screen as an advantage, but someone in the know will realize that if the resolutions are the same, the larger screen only hurts mobility.
Originally posted by Yevgeny
No, that would be a legal disaster for Apple. You can't redefine what G4 means without facing a horrible class action suit from consumers who thought that well, they were getting a G4 in their iBooks. There is NO way that a 650fx is in the current iBook and Apple is just calling it a G4.
I would be the first to agree, but at the moment I can't rectify the two issues raised:
Why would Apple ignore the addition of the velocity engine to the iBook? That might well be the single biggest gain in this upgrade.
How can they dissipate the heat from a 1GHz 7455?
i obviously can´t say for sure if it will still work since they were just released today and i doubt anybody has one yet. i´m pretty sure though that the hack will still work since apple didn´t try to disable it with other recently introduced macs (emac, imac).
i think the radeon 9200 will be faster than the geforce used in the new 12" powerbook. this was the case already with the radeon 7500 in the g3 ibook compared to the older geforce chip in the first 12" powerbook model. however, the current powerbooks all offer dvi which is important if you want to use an apple display.
usually i receive feedback quickly after a new revision is available and i will post information on my website as soon as it´s save to make a statement.
there are only two reasons why the hack might not work: either the chip only supports one display (this is highly unlikely since all modern chips support 2 displays). the other reason would be a change in the driver architecture (this would most likely happen solely to make it harder to patch) but i dont think apple will do this. there´s tons of people who don´t know about the patch and thus would buy a powerbook or who wouldn´t want to take the risk (which - as you know - is minimal).
so once the first ones ship and somebody tries it, we'll get confirmation.
until then the presumption is that some form of the Spanning Hack should still work
Does it ship with Panther?
Originally posted by rajk
AFAIK, the bluetooth on the BTO machines is internal. I think if you don't get it BTO, then you have to get an external bluetooth module.
From technical specs on the Apple website:
"optional internal Bluetooth module available"
where?
if you click on the link for BTO options; wireless; Bluetooth T6295ZM/A on the techspecs page of the new G4 ibook you get this
even the price is right
Originally posted by Akumulator
Does it ship with Panther?
From the PBook pages: Processor and Memory: 1GHz PowerPC G4 processor with Velocity Engine
From the iMac and eMac Pages: Behind the PowerPC G4?s unparalleled performance is its aptly named Velocity Engine .
From the PMac G5 Pages: Apple collaborated with IBM to leverage this industry-leading design for the G5, combining an optimized Velocity Engine
From the PMac G4 Pages: Velocity Engine for 128-bit single-instruction, multiple data (SIMD) processing
From the iBook Pages:
(cricket noises)
Okay, maybe I'm just experiencing X-Files withdrawal?but?
Originally posted by gar
where?
if you click on the link for BTO options; wireless; Bluetooth T6295ZM/A on the techspecs page of the new G4 ibook you get this
even the price is right
That's probably just for people who don't get it internally. Look a few lines up, under Wireless Support and you see this:
The internal module in the iMac is the same price, as well.
Originally posted by gar
Is that a no, or are you shaking your head at my ignorance?
Originally posted by shetline
A consolidation of all the major differences I could think of between the $US1599 1GHz 12" PowerBook and the $US1099 800 MHz G4 iBook:
12" G4 PowerBook advantagesFaster by 200 MHz.
Double L2 cache (512K vs. 256K).
10 GB more drive space (40GB vs 30GB).
More expandable memory (1152MB vs. 640MB) -- expandable without throwing 128MB away in order to add more memory.
DVI video.
Better video card (NVIDIA GeForce FX Go5200 vs. ATI Mobility Radeon 9200, both 32 MB).
Monitor spanning
Bluetooth included.
Midrange-enhancing third speaker.
Analog audio input.
Smaller (0.17" thinner, 0.3" narrower, 0.5" less deep).
Lighter (by 0.3 lb., 4.6 lb. vs. 4.9 lb.)
Nicer looking Aluminum case (although that's subjective), with perhaps better heat dissipation. (I'd imagine the iBook's fan might run a bit more often to get rid of heat that isn't shed as easily through a plastic shell).
12" G4 iBook advantages$US500 cheaper.
Perhaps more rugged than the PowerBook.
One more hour of rated battery usage (6 vs.5), with a slightly more capacious battery (50 watt hours vs. 47).
I've owned a 12' ibook before i sold and upgraded to a 12' powerbook, and you're completely forgetting the wonderful keyboard on the Al powerbook!! it's awesome...
DVI out and analog input i think are huge differences...but i think this iBook is a strong update from Apple...
There is an ambiguity in the memory specs
256MB, expandable to 640MB
Versus
# One of the following memory configurations:
* 256MB of SDRAM (128MB built in and 128MB in SO-DIMM slot)
* 384MB of SDRAM (128MB built in and 256MB in SO-DIMM slot)
* 640MB of SDRAM (128MB built in and 512MB in SO-DIMM slot)
# One open SO-DIMM slot; support for up to 1.25GB
The tech spec part implies that there are TWO so-dimm slots, Im interested to here what others think about it. I know that the tech specs have been wrong before.
I also note that the powerplug is on the right hand side, which is a real shame. It really prevents the possibility of building a dock for the iBook.