Apple has bought into this "it mist be thin" mentality and it is getting annoying. Some people want light ultra thin portables, and others want powerful portables that can really get the work done.
I want a G5 powerbook and I don't care if they have to make it 2" thick -- my G3 wallstreet powerbook was 2" thick and weighed about 8 pounds and I had no problem carrying it around. I loved that machine.
Apple has bought into this "it mist be thin" mentality and it is getting annoying. Some people want light ultra thin portables, and others want powerful portables that can really get the work done.
I want a G5 powerbook and I don't care if they have to make it 2" thick -- my G3 wallstreet powerbook was 2" thick and weighed about 8 pounds and I had no problem carrying it around. I loved that machine.
Apple has bought into this "it mist be thin" mentality and it is getting annoying. Some people want light ultra thin portables, and others want powerful portables that can really get the work done.
I want a G5 powerbook and I don't care if they have to make it 2" thick -- my G3 wallstreet powerbook was 2" thick and weighed about 8 pounds and I had no problem carrying it around. I loved that machine.
while i would obviously prefer a thinner and lighter book, i too could go for a wall-street sized laptop. the wall streets were a lot more durable too, and my dad's been using his for six years now i guess...
if i knew that the extra thickness and weight gave me a more durable, faster machine, i don't think i would hesitate.
Apple has bought into this "it mist be thin" mentality and it is getting annoying. Some people want light ultra thin portables, and others want powerful portables that can really get the work done.
I want a G5 powerbook and I don't care if they have to make it 2" thick -- my G3 wallstreet powerbook was 2" thick and weighed about 8 pounds and I had no problem carrying it around. I loved that machine.
You are hitting a somewhat interesting spot: some people want true portable others want "luggable" desktop replacements.
There is no one-size-fit's all. I love my 17" (1" thick!) and I would not want it to be any bigger. But at the same time I think the 1.5GHz G4 is just fine for a portable machine. Of course I'd like to get a dual 1GHz G4 with the additional speed, but never at the compromise of more weight or even bigger dimensions.
Other people may well want to trade in portability for raw speed! I think ther will be space for both kinds of machines:
- G4 low-voltage thin true mobile machines
- G5 desktop replacement machines that are "luggable"
Other people may well want to trade in portability for raw speed! I think ther will be space for both kinds of machines:
- G4 low-voltage thin true mobile machines
- G5 desktop replacement machines that are "luggable"
I agree. These should be the two portable lines, not some weird distinction between "professional" and "consumer".
Why does the professional-consumer dichotomy not make sense? Because it is not true that professionals always need more power than consumers.
A professional might only use the computer to read and write documents, surf the web and read mail. This professional needs very little power (1 GHz is overkill), but she travels a lot and would appreciate long battery life and low weight.
A professional photographer might use the computer for RAW file workflow, and for some Photoshop work. A few years ago, the phrase "heavy photoshop work" was used as a reason why we needed ever more powerful computers. No longer the case. Photoshop is plenty fast enough on any recent computer, Intel or PowerPC.
A consumer might have a hobby such as video editing or 3D rendering. This consumer needs a powerful computer. His kids won't let him work at it while he's at home, so he only gets to do this while commuting to work. That's why he needs a portable.
Another consumer likes to play games. Games still benefit from as much CPU power as you can throw at them. Better get the thick G5.
My point in all these examples, is that the consumer-pro dichotomy does not make sense. It does not make sense to make a consumer buy an expensive "pro" machine with gigabit ethernet and a larger HD just because they want to edit home movies. It does not make sense to make a lawyer who needs very little computing power buy a G5, just because the iBook looks like a toy.
The better dichotomy is heavy and powerful vs thin and elegant.
I suppose Apple have painted themselves into a corner here.
1 inch-ish is the Apple benchmark.
Are they really going to go backwards for 2 inch back to the wallstreet for be compared to Wintel 'battle tank' laptops?
No. I don't think so.
The iMac G5 clearly shows Apple will not repeat the 'mold' but break it.
Ergo. Expect the G5 laptop to include a striking design one-step removed from alu and about the same thickness and made from some new...jazzy material.
Apple has to innovate. They are 'THE' laptop maker by most critical standards. Even many PC commentators cede this.
That's not to say the screens are cutting edge or the cpu power couldn't be better.
But instead you get, better battery life, better design, sleeker...the best 17 incher in the business....backlit keyboard...fully featured...and gorgeous.
Still, pull finger out Apple and get out the 'last' (again) G4 speed grade. 1.8-2.0?
We'll see.
Hopefully a G5 Antares 'laptop' variant will re-define the laptop performance equation. Hey, folks, Intel are talking dual core .65 for 2nd half 05. Worried yet?
Apple has bought into this "it mist be thin" mentality and it is getting annoying. Some people want light ultra thin portables, and others want powerful portables that can really get the work done.
I want a G5 powerbook and I don't care if they have to make it 2" thick -- my G3 wallstreet powerbook was 2" thick and weighed about 8 pounds and I had no problem carrying it around. I loved that machine.
Since Apple only has one PowerBook line, it has to balance everyone's needs. This unfortunately means that people who are willing to disregard one variable entirely (power, weight, battery life, size, features, etc.) aren't going to be entirely happy. On the other hand, this approach is what gives Apple its reputation as a laptop maker: Instead of loading a bunch of almost-there designs into a shotgun and firing them into the market, it offers a few great all-around designs.
If Apple's going to target niches like the ultralight and the schleptop (you could argue that the iMac targets the latter, actually...) then they need one thing: Sales. The bigger their market (not necessarily market share; I'm thinking in terms of real, concrete numbers) the more niches they can profitably target. There are some that they might not target for a long time simply because the compromises involved don't meet Apple's standards for overall ease of use — I'm thinking of the ultralights with less than an hour's battery life, cramped keyboards, SquinTronic™ displays, external opticals, etc.
Well, I somewhat disagree. My wife looks very good, but she doesn't do too much. Still I'm happy. Sure I'd love it if in addition to looking great she also brought me a beer when I got home and ironed my clothes, etc..., but I'm not prepared to see her put on 30 pounds and grow a moustache if that's what it takes to get a beer.
I agree its not for everyone (and why some people therefore marry overweight, moustached women), but it sure is consistent with the positioning of Apple - looks great, and it's performance vis a vis the competition is questionable.
P.S. please don't elaborate on the metaphor used above. It only goes so far.
Apple will find a compromise between the thickness and the power. Of course Apple wants to offer a PowerBook G5 that's as thin or thinner than the current line, but that probably wont happen, and they'll probably be more expensive or the same price.
I can't see Apple releasing anything larger than a 1.2 inch thick PowerBook G5. They wont do it, they'll withhold the release of the product until they can get it to their standards.
Well, I somewhat disagree. My wife looks very good, but she doesn't do too much. Still I'm happy. Sure I'd love it if in addition to looking great she also brought me a beer when I got home and ironed my clothes, etc..., but I'm not prepared to see her put on 30 pounds and grow a moustache if that's what it takes to get a beer.
Well, I somewhat disagree. My wife looks very good, but she doesn't do too much. Still I'm happy. Sure I'd love it if in addition to looking great she also brought me a beer when I got home and ironed my clothes, etc..., but I'm not prepared to see her put on 30 pounds and grow a moustache if that's what it takes to get a beer.
You broke a cardinal rule here, buddy. You may think you're getting off easy because of the "My wife looks ver good" thing, but you're not. Memorize the following words to live by:
Never, ever, discuss wives in threads with the word "thickness" in the title. Never!
My ex was like a Dell. Thick but she works hard. She was fussy and had a habit of suddenly refusing to respond. She also spent far too much time playing games. I also found it very difficult to do what I wanted to do, rather than what I had to do, and I didn't really develop the enjoyment of doing what I had to do. I didn't feel like I could explore new things with her.
Comments
I want a G5 powerbook and I don't care if they have to make it 2" thick -- my G3 wallstreet powerbook was 2" thick and weighed about 8 pounds and I had no problem carrying it around. I loved that machine.
Originally posted by Res
Apple has bought into this "it mist be thin" mentality and it is getting annoying. Some people want light ultra thin portables, and others want powerful portables that can really get the work done.
I want a G5 powerbook and I don't care if they have to make it 2" thick -- my G3 wallstreet powerbook was 2" thick and weighed about 8 pounds and I had no problem carrying it around. I loved that machine.
HERE, HERE !!
Finaly Someone with Sense !
Yes it's WHAT IT DOES NOT WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE !
Originally posted by Res
Apple has bought into this "it mist be thin" mentality and it is getting annoying. Some people want light ultra thin portables, and others want powerful portables that can really get the work done.
I want a G5 powerbook and I don't care if they have to make it 2" thick -- my G3 wallstreet powerbook was 2" thick and weighed about 8 pounds and I had no problem carrying it around. I loved that machine.
while i would obviously prefer a thinner and lighter book, i too could go for a wall-street sized laptop. the wall streets were a lot more durable too, and my dad's been using his for six years now i guess...
if i knew that the extra thickness and weight gave me a more durable, faster machine, i don't think i would hesitate.
Originally posted by The Angel of the Abyss
HERE, HERE !!
Finaly Someone with Sense !
Yes it's WHAT IT DOES NOT WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE !
Hear, hear, perhaps.
Originally posted by Res
Apple has bought into this "it mist be thin" mentality and it is getting annoying. Some people want light ultra thin portables, and others want powerful portables that can really get the work done.
I want a G5 powerbook and I don't care if they have to make it 2" thick -- my G3 wallstreet powerbook was 2" thick and weighed about 8 pounds and I had no problem carrying it around. I loved that machine.
You are hitting a somewhat interesting spot: some people want true portable others want "luggable" desktop replacements.
There is no one-size-fit's all. I love my 17" (1" thick!) and I would not want it to be any bigger. But at the same time I think the 1.5GHz G4 is just fine for a portable machine. Of course I'd like to get a dual 1GHz G4 with the additional speed, but never at the compromise of more weight or even bigger dimensions.
Other people may well want to trade in portability for raw speed! I think ther will be space for both kinds of machines:
- G4 low-voltage thin true mobile machines
- G5 desktop replacement machines that are "luggable"
Originally posted by BNOYHTUAWB
Other people may well want to trade in portability for raw speed! I think ther will be space for both kinds of machines:
- G4 low-voltage thin true mobile machines
- G5 desktop replacement machines that are "luggable"
I agree. These should be the two portable lines, not some weird distinction between "professional" and "consumer".
Why does the professional-consumer dichotomy not make sense? Because it is not true that professionals always need more power than consumers.
A professional might only use the computer to read and write documents, surf the web and read mail. This professional needs very little power (1 GHz is overkill), but she travels a lot and would appreciate long battery life and low weight.
A professional photographer might use the computer for RAW file workflow, and for some Photoshop work. A few years ago, the phrase "heavy photoshop work" was used as a reason why we needed ever more powerful computers. No longer the case. Photoshop is plenty fast enough on any recent computer, Intel or PowerPC.
A consumer might have a hobby such as video editing or 3D rendering. This consumer needs a powerful computer. His kids won't let him work at it while he's at home, so he only gets to do this while commuting to work. That's why he needs a portable.
Another consumer likes to play games. Games still benefit from as much CPU power as you can throw at them. Better get the thick G5.
My point in all these examples, is that the consumer-pro dichotomy does not make sense. It does not make sense to make a consumer buy an expensive "pro" machine with gigabit ethernet and a larger HD just because they want to edit home movies. It does not make sense to make a lawyer who needs very little computing power buy a G5, just because the iBook looks like a toy.
The better dichotomy is heavy and powerful vs thin and elegant.
1 inch-ish is the Apple benchmark.
Are they really going to go backwards for 2 inch back to the wallstreet for be compared to Wintel 'battle tank' laptops?
No. I don't think so.
The iMac G5 clearly shows Apple will not repeat the 'mold' but break it.
Ergo. Expect the G5 laptop to include a striking design one-step removed from alu and about the same thickness and made from some new...jazzy material.
Apple has to innovate. They are 'THE' laptop maker by most critical standards. Even many PC commentators cede this.
That's not to say the screens are cutting edge or the cpu power couldn't be better.
But instead you get, better battery life, better design, sleeker...the best 17 incher in the business....backlit keyboard...fully featured...and gorgeous.
Still, pull finger out Apple and get out the 'last' (again) G4 speed grade. 1.8-2.0?
We'll see.
Hopefully a G5 Antares 'laptop' variant will re-define the laptop performance equation. Hey, folks, Intel are talking dual core .65 for 2nd half 05. Worried yet?
I hope PPC responds.
Go to vr-zone.com and see the roadmaps...
Lemon Bon Bon
Originally posted by Res
Apple has bought into this "it mist be thin" mentality and it is getting annoying. Some people want light ultra thin portables, and others want powerful portables that can really get the work done.
The people who want light ultra thin portables aren't happy either.
I want a G5 powerbook and I don't care if they have to make it 2" thick -- my G3 wallstreet powerbook was 2" thick and weighed about 8 pounds and I had no problem carrying it around. I loved that machine.
Since Apple only has one PowerBook line, it has to balance everyone's needs. This unfortunately means that people who are willing to disregard one variable entirely (power, weight, battery life, size, features, etc.) aren't going to be entirely happy. On the other hand, this approach is what gives Apple its reputation as a laptop maker: Instead of loading a bunch of almost-there designs into a shotgun and firing them into the market, it offers a few great all-around designs.
If Apple's going to target niches like the ultralight and the schleptop (you could argue that the iMac targets the latter, actually...) then they need one thing: Sales. The bigger their market (not necessarily market share; I'm thinking in terms of real, concrete numbers) the more niches they can profitably target. There are some that they might not target for a long time simply because the compromises involved don't meet Apple's standards for overall ease of use — I'm thinking of the ultralights with less than an hour's battery life, cramped keyboards, SquinTronic™ displays, external opticals, etc.
Originally posted by The Angel of the Abyss
Yes it's WHAT IT DOES NOT WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE !
Well, I somewhat disagree. My wife looks very good, but she doesn't do too much. Still I'm happy. Sure I'd love it if in addition to looking great she also brought me a beer when I got home and ironed my clothes, etc..., but I'm not prepared to see her put on 30 pounds and grow a moustache if that's what it takes to get a beer.
I agree its not for everyone (and why some people therefore marry overweight, moustached women), but it sure is consistent with the positioning of Apple - looks great, and it's performance vis a vis the competition is questionable.
P.S. please don't elaborate on the metaphor used above. It only goes so far.
Originally posted by vr6
P.S. please don't elaborate on the metaphor used above. It only goes so far.
So you're not going to tell us about her battery life?
Oh yeah... no worries, just put her to sleep after use.
Originally posted by dfiler
So you're not going to tell us about her battery life?
Oh yeah... no worries, just put her to sleep after use.
I'm surprised that's the best you could come up with, but hopefully that'll be the end of it.
I can't see Apple releasing anything larger than a 1.2 inch thick PowerBook G5. They wont do it, they'll withhold the release of the product until they can get it to their standards.
Originally posted by vr6
Well, I somewhat disagree. My wife looks very good, but she doesn't do too much. Still I'm happy. Sure I'd love it if in addition to looking great she also brought me a beer when I got home and ironed my clothes, etc..., but I'm not prepared to see her put on 30 pounds and grow a moustache if that's what it takes to get a beer.
Originally posted by vr6
Well, I somewhat disagree. My wife looks very good, but she doesn't do too much. Still I'm happy. Sure I'd love it if in addition to looking great she also brought me a beer when I got home and ironed my clothes, etc..., but I'm not prepared to see her put on 30 pounds and grow a moustache if that's what it takes to get a beer.
You broke a cardinal rule here, buddy. You may think you're getting off easy because of the "My wife looks ver good" thing, but you're not. Memorize the following words to live by:
Never, ever, discuss wives in threads with the word "thickness" in the title. Never!
Originally posted by tonton
My ex was like a Dell. Thick but she works hard. She was fussy and had a habit of suddenly refusing to respond. She also spent far too much time playing games. I also found it very difficult to do what I wanted to do, rather than what I had to do, and I didn't really develop the enjoyment of doing what I had to do. I didn't feel like I could explore new things with her.
Now that's funny!