I would take nothing more than 1". This is the standard Apple prides themself on and I will be more than happy to wait until a G5 can fit into a 1" enclosure.
Is it really worth butchering up a server G5 chip enough to put in a laptop? The chip would need to be crippled to save on battery life, heat and case size. I used to be waiting for a G5 Powerbook but now I think a better solution would be a chip more built for a portable.
Q: Will the work that went into the iMac help you for a G5 PowerBook?
There's still a luxury we have in two inches that we don't have in a fraction of an inch, if you think about how much space there really is in the bottom of a PowerBook. We've not been willing to do a battleship-like product that some of the PC guys have done with their PC notebooks that use desktop processors. Certainly we were trying to learn from the iMac, but not like, "Oh, there's this breakthrough now, expect it next month.
I'd be happy to get a G5 powerbook that was up to 1 1/4" thick to get it
by February. What would be your cut-off point for how thick your powerbook
G5 should be?
0.99999999999999999999"
I'm just happy with a G4, maybe a dual G4 or a dual-core G4 at some point. I do not see what advantage a G5 could have in a Laptop except reducing battery-time to 20min ;-)
I would take nothing more than 1". This is the standard Apple prides themself on and I will be more than happy to wait until a G5 can fit into a 1" enclosure.
Mr North hits the bullseye here with great accuracy. The thing that really set the original PowerBooks apart from the competition was the ability to run for extended times on battery and still deliver good performance. Apple seems to have lost focus on that one factor in PB acceptance but I still believe that it is a significant factor in the market place.
While there will aways be a battle between competeing features and the impact on battery life the G5 would so unbalance the equation as to produce a useless machine. It would be fantastic if Apple could maintain the same form factor they currently have, at this time that means a G4 derived processor. Maybe IBM will resolve the problems with the 970FX but I wouldn't wait to long for that to happen!
Dave
Quote:
Originally posted by Peter North
Is it really worth butchering up a server G5 chip enough to put in a laptop? The chip would need to be crippled to save on battery life, heat and case size. I used to be waiting for a G5 Powerbook but now I think a better solution would be a chip more built for a portable.
While there will aways be a battle between competeing features and the impact on battery life the G5 would so unbalance the equation as to produce a useless machine.
There is no evidence of this, that a G5 laptop would be useless.
Quote:
It would be fantastic if Apple could maintain the same form factor they currently have, at this time that means a G4 derived processor.
Apple always has a choice of making a 3 tier laptop lineup.
Low-end: 1.3" thick iBook G4 from $1000 to $1400
Mid-range: average 1.1" thick Powerbook G4 from $1500 to $2300
High-end: ~1.5" thick Powerbook G5 from $2300 to $3000
Or, if one wants to think in terms of markets: Consumer, Professional, and Mobile. But they like their margins too much right now to change anything. Apple probably makes close to $1500 for each 17" Powerbook G4 and $800 for each 15" Powerbook G4 sold.
Call me cynical and naive, but I think Apple can already build a 1.2" thick G5 Powerbook. The reason they don't release one is is chip supply - they could not come close to meeting the demand.
G4 Powerbooks are still selling extremely well at splendid margins. In the meantime, there aren't enough G5 chips to feed even the demand for the Powermac (and now the iMac line as well which has been held up for over two months and is still a month away from shipping). Remember, Apple sells more laptop machines than desktop units so a G5 laptop would more than double the demand for chips. That would simply be a stupid move when you're already running a shortage.
However, if Apple said the same thing about the PowerBook that they said about the iMac - that a G5 version is just around the corner - sales of the G4 would dry up in anticipation of the G5.
When IBM demonstrates that it can reliably crank up output of G5 chips, Apple will find a way to get them into PowerBooks fast. Until then, the new iMac is a good demonstration of just how little a space a G5 can live in without the need for liquid cooling. (Not having seen one in person myself I can't guess as to why it is ten pounds heavier than the 17" powerbook, but we know that there is not a refrigeration unit in the machine, just a few small fans.)
I don't see the logic of saying that if they can put it in 2" they must be able to put it in 1.2". Remember that the 1.2" in a laptop has a top panel, a screen, a keyboard, a logic board and a bottom panel.
The iMac, in 2 inches has just a screen, a logic board and a back panel (the front bezel and the back plugs are not in the same place as the G5). So obviously the logic board has a lot more room for chip and cooling equipment in an iMac as opposed to a laptop. Besides, if the back of an iMac heats 120 degrees, that's OK. If the bottom plate of a laptop heats to 120 degrees, it could burn you.
So we've got a bigger challenge for cooling, more stringent cooling requirements, and less power available. I'd say it's not coming anytime soon.
Quote:
Originally posted by vr6
Call me cynical and naive, but I think Apple can already build a 1.2" thick G5 Powerbook. The reason they don't release one is is chip supply - they could not come close to meeting the demand.
G4 Powerbooks are still selling extremely well at splendid margins. In the meantime, there aren't enough G5 chips to feed even the demand for the Powermac (and now the iMac line as well which has been held up for over two months and is still a month away from shipping). Remember, Apple sells more laptop machines than desktop units so a G5 laptop would more than double the demand for chips. That would simply be a stupid move when you're already running a shortage.
However, if Apple said the same thing about the PowerBook that they said about the iMac - that a G5 version is just around the corner - sales of the G4 would dry up in anticipation of the G5.
When IBM demonstrates that it can reliably crank up output of G5 chips, Apple will find a way to get them into PowerBooks fast. Until then, the new iMac is a good demonstration of just how little a space a G5 can live in without the need for liquid cooling. (Not having seen one in person myself I can't guess as to why it is ten pounds heavier than the 17" powerbook, but we know that there is not a refrigeration unit in the machine, just a few small fans.)
Cynical on whether they're telling the truth about not being able to do it, naive about the complexity of doing.
I'm by no means saying that for sure it can be done, just that it's in their interest, based on chip supply, to say that it can't be done. The G5 is no hotter than an intel chip and they've been in laptops for quite some time (granted with shorter battery lives, bigger fans and more bulk.)
Don't underestimate the creativity at Apple in designing a laptop. They invented it after all. Who knows, they may choose to go with a design (for the reasons you mentioned) that has the CPU and logic board on the back of the screen, but a much thinner keyboard portion on the bottom. It helps with cooling to do that, but would obviously be top heavy, so some additional creativity would be needed to keep the center of gravity over the main unit so it doesn't fall backwards. For example, maybe the screen could rise on an arm to be centered over the base, bringing the screen closer to your face as you type (a great added benefit for the small screen on a 12" Powerbook like the one I have). Anyhow, I don't mean to try to design the next Powerbook here at all. I just thought I would share my thoughts on a bigger showstopper than cooling the chips - which is that there aren't enough chips to cool in the first place.
Quote:
Originally posted by synp
So which is it? Cynical or naive? :-)
I don't see the logic of saying that if they can put it in 2" they must be able to put it in 1.2". Remember that the 1.2" in a laptop has a top panel, a screen, a keyboard, a logic board and a bottom panel.
The iMac, in 2 inches has just a screen, a logic board and a back panel (the front bezel and the back plugs are not in the same place as the G5). So obviously the logic board has a lot more room for chip and cooling equipment in an iMac as opposed to a laptop. Besides, if the back of an iMac heats 120 degrees, that's OK. If the bottom plate of a laptop heats to 120 degrees, it could burn you.
So we've got a bigger challenge for cooling, more stringent cooling requirements, and less power available. I'd say it's not coming anytime soon.
I agree that chip supplies are too low, but I think that if they could put a G5 in a laptop today, they would be in the PowerBook, rather than in the iMac.
In the long run, Apple has motivation to move its entire line to a G5. Why? Because until all their computers are 64-bit, they cannot release an operating system that's really 64-bit. They can only have some kind of dual-mode.
Tiger is going to be 32-bit with the ability to run 64-bit address spaces. If they want version to be truly 64-bit, they need to get their entire line to G5. For PB, they will need to do it at least a year before Tiger+1 comes out, because they need to feel that they can upgrade their operating system if the upgrade comes out so soon after they've bought their powerbook.
Quote:
Originally posted by vr6
Cynical on whether they're telling the truth about not being able to do it, naive about the complexity of doing.
I'm by no means saying that for sure it can be done, just that it's in their interest, based on chip supply, to say that it can't be done. The G5 is no hotter than an intel chip and they've been in laptops for quite some time (granted with shorter battery lives, bigger fans and more bulk.)
Don't underestimate the creativity at Apple in designing a laptop. They invented it after all. Who knows, they may choose to go with a design (for the reasons you mentioned) that has the CPU and logic board on the back of the screen, but a much thinner keyboard portion on the bottom. It helps with cooling to do that, but would obviously be top heavy, so some additional creativity would be needed to keep the center of gravity over the main unit so it doesn't fall backwards. For example, maybe the screen could rise on an arm to be centered over the base, bringing the screen closer to your face as you type (a great added benefit for the small screen on a 12" Powerbook like the one I have). Anyhow, I don't mean to try to design the next Powerbook here at all. I just thought I would share my thoughts on a bigger showstopper than cooling the chips - which is that there aren't enough chips to cool in the first place.
I agree that chip supplies are too low, but I think that if they could put a G5 in a laptop today, they would be in the PowerBook, rather than in the iMac.
Maybe, but iMac needed badly to differentiate itself from the eMac beyond just the screen. Also, the iMac is a lower volume seller than the Powerbook (note that in their quarterly releases apple lumps eMacs and iMacs into the line called iMacs - but when they do break it out the eMac greatly outsells the iMac). Anyhow, you're probably right.
i agree with vr6, that they needed to make a difference between the imac and emac. before the g5 upgrade, there was no difference between the two, except one had a CRT and one had an LCD, and the extra $400 on the price tag. thats one reason i don't think they'll be updating the emac soon. also, i agree that by putting the g5 in the imac rather than the PB, they could worry less about demand, since fewer people buy imacs now than they did when they first came out. if they shipped the PB with a G5, they'd be backed up for months and months to come, much like when the Playstation 2 first came out. bad times
Well if you expect that laptop to run for any length of time, on battery, the current G5 would certainly make for a rather useless machine. The evidence is pretty clear that the current 970 will not be going into an Apple form factor machine at this time. Just take a good close look at current cooling solutions.
Now that doesn't mean that IBM isn't trying to clean up its pathetic performance with repsect to the 970 and actually come out with a low power device. Just that such a chip doesn't currently exist in public.
Dave
Quote:
Originally posted by THT
There is no evidence of this, that a G5 laptop would be useless.
to state such rigid and arbitrary positions is a bit silly, and will ultimately severly limit your own happiness.
I'am happy, I have a 1" thick 17" PowerBook. I do not care about the chip in there but about the overall performance, which is more than decent except maybe for video encoding work!
Comments
Q: Will the work that went into the iMac help you for a G5 PowerBook?
There's still a luxury we have in two inches that we don't have in a fraction of an inch, if you think about how much space there really is in the bottom of a PowerBook. We've not been willing to do a battleship-like product that some of the PC guys have done with their PC notebooks that use desktop processors. Certainly we were trying to learn from the iMac, but not like, "Oh, there's this breakthrough now, expect it next month.
Originally posted by mello
I'd be happy to get a G5 powerbook that was up to 1 1/4" thick to get it
by February. What would be your cut-off point for how thick your powerbook
G5 should be?
0.99999999999999999999"
I'm just happy with a G4, maybe a dual G4 or a dual-core G4 at some point. I do not see what advantage a G5 could have in a Laptop except reducing battery-time to 20min ;-)
Originally posted by filmmaker2002
I would take nothing more than 1". This is the standard Apple prides themself on and I will be more than happy to wait until a G5 can fit into a 1" enclosure.
um...
duh
12" > 1.18"
15" > 1.1"
17" > 1.0"
to state such rigid and arbitrary positions is a bit silly, and will ultimately severly limit your own happiness.
While there will aways be a battle between competeing features and the impact on battery life the G5 would so unbalance the equation as to produce a useless machine. It would be fantastic if Apple could maintain the same form factor they currently have, at this time that means a G4 derived processor. Maybe IBM will resolve the problems with the 970FX but I wouldn't wait to long for that to happen!
Dave
Originally posted by Peter North
Is it really worth butchering up a server G5 chip enough to put in a laptop? The chip would need to be crippled to save on battery life, heat and case size. I used to be waiting for a G5 Powerbook but now I think a better solution would be a chip more built for a portable.
Originally posted by wizard69
While there will aways be a battle between competeing features and the impact on battery life the G5 would so unbalance the equation as to produce a useless machine.
There is no evidence of this, that a G5 laptop would be useless.
It would be fantastic if Apple could maintain the same form factor they currently have, at this time that means a G4 derived processor.
Apple always has a choice of making a 3 tier laptop lineup.
Low-end: 1.3" thick iBook G4 from $1000 to $1400
Mid-range: average 1.1" thick Powerbook G4 from $1500 to $2300
High-end: ~1.5" thick Powerbook G5 from $2300 to $3000
Or, if one wants to think in terms of markets: Consumer, Professional, and Mobile. But they like their margins too much right now to change anything. Apple probably makes close to $1500 for each 17" Powerbook G4 and $800 for each 15" Powerbook G4 sold.
G4 Powerbooks are still selling extremely well at splendid margins. In the meantime, there aren't enough G5 chips to feed even the demand for the Powermac (and now the iMac line as well which has been held up for over two months and is still a month away from shipping). Remember, Apple sells more laptop machines than desktop units so a G5 laptop would more than double the demand for chips. That would simply be a stupid move when you're already running a shortage.
However, if Apple said the same thing about the PowerBook that they said about the iMac - that a G5 version is just around the corner - sales of the G4 would dry up in anticipation of the G5.
When IBM demonstrates that it can reliably crank up output of G5 chips, Apple will find a way to get them into PowerBooks fast. Until then, the new iMac is a good demonstration of just how little a space a G5 can live in without the need for liquid cooling. (Not having seen one in person myself I can't guess as to why it is ten pounds heavier than the 17" powerbook, but we know that there is not a refrigeration unit in the machine, just a few small fans.)
I don't see the logic of saying that if they can put it in 2" they must be able to put it in 1.2". Remember that the 1.2" in a laptop has a top panel, a screen, a keyboard, a logic board and a bottom panel.
The iMac, in 2 inches has just a screen, a logic board and a back panel (the front bezel and the back plugs are not in the same place as the G5). So obviously the logic board has a lot more room for chip and cooling equipment in an iMac as opposed to a laptop. Besides, if the back of an iMac heats 120 degrees, that's OK. If the bottom plate of a laptop heats to 120 degrees, it could burn you.
So we've got a bigger challenge for cooling, more stringent cooling requirements, and less power available. I'd say it's not coming anytime soon.
Originally posted by vr6
Call me cynical and naive, but I think Apple can already build a 1.2" thick G5 Powerbook. The reason they don't release one is is chip supply - they could not come close to meeting the demand.
G4 Powerbooks are still selling extremely well at splendid margins. In the meantime, there aren't enough G5 chips to feed even the demand for the Powermac (and now the iMac line as well which has been held up for over two months and is still a month away from shipping). Remember, Apple sells more laptop machines than desktop units so a G5 laptop would more than double the demand for chips. That would simply be a stupid move when you're already running a shortage.
However, if Apple said the same thing about the PowerBook that they said about the iMac - that a G5 version is just around the corner - sales of the G4 would dry up in anticipation of the G5.
When IBM demonstrates that it can reliably crank up output of G5 chips, Apple will find a way to get them into PowerBooks fast. Until then, the new iMac is a good demonstration of just how little a space a G5 can live in without the need for liquid cooling. (Not having seen one in person myself I can't guess as to why it is ten pounds heavier than the 17" powerbook, but we know that there is not a refrigeration unit in the machine, just a few small fans.)
I'm by no means saying that for sure it can be done, just that it's in their interest, based on chip supply, to say that it can't be done. The G5 is no hotter than an intel chip and they've been in laptops for quite some time (granted with shorter battery lives, bigger fans and more bulk.)
Don't underestimate the creativity at Apple in designing a laptop. They invented it after all. Who knows, they may choose to go with a design (for the reasons you mentioned) that has the CPU and logic board on the back of the screen, but a much thinner keyboard portion on the bottom. It helps with cooling to do that, but would obviously be top heavy, so some additional creativity would be needed to keep the center of gravity over the main unit so it doesn't fall backwards. For example, maybe the screen could rise on an arm to be centered over the base, bringing the screen closer to your face as you type (a great added benefit for the small screen on a 12" Powerbook like the one I have). Anyhow, I don't mean to try to design the next Powerbook here at all. I just thought I would share my thoughts on a bigger showstopper than cooling the chips - which is that there aren't enough chips to cool in the first place.
Originally posted by synp
So which is it? Cynical or naive? :-)
I don't see the logic of saying that if they can put it in 2" they must be able to put it in 1.2". Remember that the 1.2" in a laptop has a top panel, a screen, a keyboard, a logic board and a bottom panel.
The iMac, in 2 inches has just a screen, a logic board and a back panel (the front bezel and the back plugs are not in the same place as the G5). So obviously the logic board has a lot more room for chip and cooling equipment in an iMac as opposed to a laptop. Besides, if the back of an iMac heats 120 degrees, that's OK. If the bottom plate of a laptop heats to 120 degrees, it could burn you.
So we've got a bigger challenge for cooling, more stringent cooling requirements, and less power available. I'd say it's not coming anytime soon.
In the long run, Apple has motivation to move its entire line to a G5. Why? Because until all their computers are 64-bit, they cannot release an operating system that's really 64-bit. They can only have some kind of dual-mode.
Tiger is going to be 32-bit with the ability to run 64-bit address spaces. If they want version to be truly 64-bit, they need to get their entire line to G5. For PB, they will need to do it at least a year before Tiger+1 comes out, because they need to feel that they can upgrade their operating system if the upgrade comes out so soon after they've bought their powerbook.
Originally posted by vr6
Cynical on whether they're telling the truth about not being able to do it, naive about the complexity of doing.
I'm by no means saying that for sure it can be done, just that it's in their interest, based on chip supply, to say that it can't be done. The G5 is no hotter than an intel chip and they've been in laptops for quite some time (granted with shorter battery lives, bigger fans and more bulk.)
Don't underestimate the creativity at Apple in designing a laptop. They invented it after all. Who knows, they may choose to go with a design (for the reasons you mentioned) that has the CPU and logic board on the back of the screen, but a much thinner keyboard portion on the bottom. It helps with cooling to do that, but would obviously be top heavy, so some additional creativity would be needed to keep the center of gravity over the main unit so it doesn't fall backwards. For example, maybe the screen could rise on an arm to be centered over the base, bringing the screen closer to your face as you type (a great added benefit for the small screen on a 12" Powerbook like the one I have). Anyhow, I don't mean to try to design the next Powerbook here at all. I just thought I would share my thoughts on a bigger showstopper than cooling the chips - which is that there aren't enough chips to cool in the first place.
new high capacity batteries for the powerbook that offer up to 54% more
time.
Originally posted by synp
I agree that chip supplies are too low, but I think that if they could put a G5 in a laptop today, they would be in the PowerBook, rather than in the iMac.
Maybe, but iMac needed badly to differentiate itself from the eMac beyond just the screen. Also, the iMac is a lower volume seller than the Powerbook (note that in their quarterly releases apple lumps eMacs and iMacs into the line called iMacs - but when they do break it out the eMac greatly outsells the iMac). Anyhow, you're probably right.
Now that doesn't mean that IBM isn't trying to clean up its pathetic performance with repsect to the 970 and actually come out with a low power device. Just that such a chip doesn't currently exist in public.
Dave
Originally posted by THT
There is no evidence of this, that a G5 laptop would be useless.
Originally posted by mello
There is always new battery technology. I just read recently about these
new high capacity batteries for the powerbook that offer up to 54% more
time.
well it wont be too long before we have power cells and our laptop will last a couple weeks or so inbetween refills
Originally posted by concentricity
um...
duh
12" > 1.18"
15" > 1.1"
17" > 1.0"
to state such rigid and arbitrary positions is a bit silly, and will ultimately severly limit your own happiness.
I'am happy, I have a 1" thick 17" PowerBook. I do not care about the chip in there but about the overall performance, which is more than decent except maybe for video encoding work!