iBooks and PowerBooks Updated!!
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Joined
·
31,035 Posts
Our take
Well the 15" iMac LCD stayed alive for a bit longer at $1849 it's elegant but we think the emac is better value with it's larger screen real estate and lower price point.
The iBooks definitely look attractive with 700s now at $1599 with the L2 cache and combos just over $2k WITH 32 meg video memory. Now that's a good incentive for portable X users. for $500 more than the entry level you get a combo drive, 50% more drive space and the 32 meg video cards ( entry has 16 megs still no slouch on this small box ). Well done Apple.
The biggest news was the long rumoured SuperDrive Powerbook and now sporting 1 gHz performance too and 64 meg video - quite a package and still under 5K WITH 512 RAM and 60 gig drive. That's a winner for the heavy hitters who need a portable studio.
The entry Powerbook drops in price yet goes up in features also a winner. 867 with a 40 gig and 32 meg video card. Pricing comes down $300 and value goes up significantly.
Overall a well executed and priced new portable line from Apple. It's been their strongest category and this just refines the product line and offers more value at lower prices
Well the 15" iMac LCD stayed alive for a bit longer at $1849 it's elegant but we think the emac is better value with it's larger screen real estate and lower price point.
The iBooks definitely look attractive with 700s now at $1599 with the L2 cache and combos just over $2k WITH 32 meg video memory. Now that's a good incentive for portable X users. for $500 more than the entry level you get a combo drive, 50% more drive space and the 32 meg video cards ( entry has 16 megs still no slouch on this small box ). Well done Apple.
The biggest news was the long rumoured SuperDrive Powerbook and now sporting 1 gHz performance too and 64 meg video - quite a package and still under 5K WITH 512 RAM and 60 gig drive. That's a winner for the heavy hitters who need a portable studio.
The entry Powerbook drops in price yet goes up in features also a winner. 867 with a 40 gig and 32 meg video card. Pricing comes down $300 and value goes up significantly.
Overall a well executed and priced new portable line from Apple. It's been their strongest category and this just refines the product line and offers more value at lower prices
Joined
·
5,140 Posts
Hey macdoc, spot on. The rumours (why oh why do I bother?) were all over the place but no one called this. Getting a 1GHz laptop out of the door is a major coup, the Radeon 64 Mb graphics card is sweet and the slot-loading superdrive is just amazing. This is a winner. No doubt. Will help the bottom line this quarter. Even though the sales numbers won't be huge, the upgrade is significant enough to get a large proportion of the TiPB installed base to lust for it. I gotta get myself one..... Would have been nice to integrate BlueTooth as the USB adaptor is a pain. Easy to lose and has to be removed in transit. Minor gripe.
Having an iBook at the US$999 price point should also be a winner. This is a great machine and "kid-tough".
Great news all around and a big raspberry to the rumours sites (I guess Apple is now tighter than a ducks butt).
Having an iBook at the US$999 price point should also be a winner. This is a great machine and "kid-tough".
Great news all around and a big raspberry to the rumours sites (I guess Apple is now tighter than a ducks butt).
Joined
·
117,654 Posts
How would the top of the line PowerBook now stack up against the top of the line iMac? I was all set to get the 17"iMac in early January, since I want the ability to create my own educational DVDs, and I did not want/need the power of a PowerMac. Now, these PBs look interesting with the SuperDrive built-in. I saw a 17" iMac at BMac in Montreal so I have an idea of how the screen looks. My vision is poor and I need to blow everything up to an 800x600 resolution. Might anyone out there tell me how the new PB screen might look at this resolution, and compared to the iMac 17"? Merci.
Joined
·
5,140 Posts
Dr. G.,
At 800X600, the resolution of the LCD screen will be pretty yukky and murky (small detail: the powerbook has a 15.1" screen and runs at 1152X768 at native resolution and 896X600 at the reduced resolution). The I don't know how the 17" iMac screen looks at that resolution, but I'd guess it would be similarly uncrisp. One thing you might note is that the SuperDrive in the powerbook runs at 1X. In the iMac it runs at 2X. There again the powerbook has better video gfx and you can (if you can afford it) run a separate monitor off the DVI connector on the back of the powerbook that spans. That would get you some of the lost real estate back. I don't think the iMac spans (just mirrors).
As for retrofitting a Superdrive, I'd guess it might be possible but the rendering time may be an issue. You can't BTO the Superdrive in the 867MHz powerbook which may just be marketing. External drives do work with G4's of lower speed so that's an alternative (albeit bulky).
jfpoole, no worries. Wait awhile and these puppies will be outdated. Wait awhile and eventually we are all outdated.
At 800X600, the resolution of the LCD screen will be pretty yukky and murky (small detail: the powerbook has a 15.1" screen and runs at 1152X768 at native resolution and 896X600 at the reduced resolution). The I don't know how the 17" iMac screen looks at that resolution, but I'd guess it would be similarly uncrisp. One thing you might note is that the SuperDrive in the powerbook runs at 1X. In the iMac it runs at 2X. There again the powerbook has better video gfx and you can (if you can afford it) run a separate monitor off the DVI connector on the back of the powerbook that spans. That would get you some of the lost real estate back. I don't think the iMac spans (just mirrors).
As for retrofitting a Superdrive, I'd guess it might be possible but the rendering time may be an issue. You can't BTO the Superdrive in the 867MHz powerbook which may just be marketing. External drives do work with G4's of lower speed so that's an alternative (albeit bulky).
jfpoole, no worries. Wait awhile and these puppies will be outdated. Wait awhile and eventually we are all outdated.
Joined
·
117,654 Posts
Thanks for the info. When your vision is as poor as mine, I give up crispness for size. I would love a 22" or 23" screen, but that is beyond my budget. I was hoping for a 19" iMac screen. While it would seem a bit odd shaped, I don't really care about the looks of the computer I utilize. Does it do what I need it to do, and can the screen display text in the size that I need it to be in order to see it for hours on end. This winter, I shall be teaching four web courses for Memorial Univ. of Newfoundland, so I shall be online constantly. We shall see (no pun intended).
Joined
·
6,788 Posts
A couplethings I have noticed:
iBook:
Combo drive is 16x8x8x24x, so CD-Rs write at 16x!! This is twice as fast as prety much every otehr laptop we sell right now, including the PowerBook, the last one and the new one. Very Cool.
Very not cool though that both the new lines have slow system bus speeds, 100 MHz and 133Mhz. They could be, and should be faster. The G3 would perform a lot better with a faster bus. The G4 could use DDR RAM as well.
I am very happy about the new Graphics chips. as they didn't manage to beat Toshiba or Sony with a superdrive, but they beat compaq with the Radeon 9000, and its 64MB!
One last thing, it is getting to be about time they put 256MB on the iBooks motherboard, and gave the top model 384 or 512 total.
Overall, I am very happy (and wishing I could trade mine up for an 800...) but these few details will always annoy me until they are changed. Still, very cool new machines!
--PB
iBook:
Combo drive is 16x8x8x24x, so CD-Rs write at 16x!! This is twice as fast as prety much every otehr laptop we sell right now, including the PowerBook, the last one and the new one. Very Cool.
Very not cool though that both the new lines have slow system bus speeds, 100 MHz and 133Mhz. They could be, and should be faster. The G3 would perform a lot better with a faster bus. The G4 could use DDR RAM as well.
I am very happy about the new Graphics chips. as they didn't manage to beat Toshiba or Sony with a superdrive, but they beat compaq with the Radeon 9000, and its 64MB!
One last thing, it is getting to be about time they put 256MB on the iBooks motherboard, and gave the top model 384 or 512 total.
Overall, I am very happy (and wishing I could trade mine up for an 800...) but these few details will always annoy me until they are changed. Still, very cool new machines!
--PB
Dr G
I am using a 15" iMac right now, and I am legally blind., about 20/400, that's about a 95% loss of vision( stable now so, I'm not worried)
I usually leave it at 1024 by 768 and found that I could get used to it.
I find that for general use the 800 by 600 is pretty decent for text and general viewing, the iMac LCD screens are so bright and offer a wide viewing angle, I havent looked at the new books yet, but I doubt you would be unhappy with the flat iMac, shoot the thing works as a nightlight at night, yet is still excellent in daylight.
I would love to have a portable but am torn between another flat mac or powerbook, I am worried about the ruggedness of the TiBook.
regards
Mark
I am using a 15" iMac right now, and I am legally blind., about 20/400, that's about a 95% loss of vision( stable now so, I'm not worried)
I usually leave it at 1024 by 768 and found that I could get used to it.
I find that for general use the 800 by 600 is pretty decent for text and general viewing, the iMac LCD screens are so bright and offer a wide viewing angle, I havent looked at the new books yet, but I doubt you would be unhappy with the flat iMac, shoot the thing works as a nightlight at night, yet is still excellent in daylight.
I would love to have a portable but am torn between another flat mac or powerbook, I am worried about the ruggedness of the TiBook.
regards
Mark
Joined
·
117,654 Posts
Minnes, my vision is better than yours (macular degeration), but I can empathize with your situation. If I don't blow up the font I can't read for very long. Since I am teaching online, and have WebCT forums for all of my courses with massive amounts of postings to read and reply to each day, I need text to be large.
I chose the iMac as my reentry Mac computer, since I have owned an original Mac and a Mac LCII for years, because of the SuperDrive. I think that how it looks is revolutionary, but I am not into the "cool factor". When the 17" model came out, I figured that this was my computer. Now, with the TiPBs, I have to consider a bit. It will be utilize only at my home, so the ruggedness criteria is not really a factor. I don't play any games or burn and rip music, but I do want to utilize the Mac that I purchase for digital video and digital photography. I have $5700 sitting in my research account right now, which can be bumped up by $400 on April 1st. I am in no hurry, in that I have a 19" monitor on my Dell Dimension, and my wife gave me here Dell Inspiron for wireless connectivity while my 16 year old son utilizes my Dell Dimension. Thus, I am in an enviable quandary.
Thanks for the info.
I chose the iMac as my reentry Mac computer, since I have owned an original Mac and a Mac LCII for years, because of the SuperDrive. I think that how it looks is revolutionary, but I am not into the "cool factor". When the 17" model came out, I figured that this was my computer. Now, with the TiPBs, I have to consider a bit. It will be utilize only at my home, so the ruggedness criteria is not really a factor. I don't play any games or burn and rip music, but I do want to utilize the Mac that I purchase for digital video and digital photography. I have $5700 sitting in my research account right now, which can be bumped up by $400 on April 1st. I am in no hurry, in that I have a 19" monitor on my Dell Dimension, and my wife gave me here Dell Inspiron for wireless connectivity while my 16 year old son utilizes my Dell Dimension. Thus, I am in an enviable quandary.
Thanks for the info.
Joined
·
5,140 Posts
Dr. G and minnes,
I assume you know about the Universal Access panel in the System Prefs of OS X 10.2.1? This allows you to zoom, switch to white on black, etc., etc. The Quartz anti-aliasing and Quartz Extreme (which will run at full whack on either the iMac or titaniums) makes the muddiness of the lower resolutions significantly better than it was.
I was in St. John's for a CIHR advisory board meeting last month Dr. G. My first visit. Even sampled some screech. I'm ordering a SuperDrive titanium (with the justification that Air Canada is cutting back so much on costs that I need the GHz processor to keep warm during flights....).
I assume you know about the Universal Access panel in the System Prefs of OS X 10.2.1? This allows you to zoom, switch to white on black, etc., etc. The Quartz anti-aliasing and Quartz Extreme (which will run at full whack on either the iMac or titaniums) makes the muddiness of the lower resolutions significantly better than it was.
I was in St. John's for a CIHR advisory board meeting last month Dr. G. My first visit. Even sampled some screech. I'm ordering a SuperDrive titanium (with the justification that Air Canada is cutting back so much on costs that I need the GHz processor to keep warm during flights....).
Joined
·
117,654 Posts
Thanks for the info, jwoodget. White on black for someone with macular degeneration is torture, but a zoom mode might prove useful.
Re St.John's, people who come back after 10+ years are amazed at the amount of development around the city. The university has grown, the city has a new stadium (where the baby Leafs play before they are shipped up to TO), a new convention center, and new housing everywhere. The rest of the province is dying, but things are booming here in St. John's. I do not say this in a gloating manner, in that I am a person who believes that rural areas need to be preserved and serviced. I guess it was my New York City upbringing that helps me to appreciate the importance of rural life.
Re St.John's, people who come back after 10+ years are amazed at the amount of development around the city. The university has grown, the city has a new stadium (where the baby Leafs play before they are shipped up to TO), a new convention center, and new housing everywhere. The rest of the province is dying, but things are booming here in St. John's. I do not say this in a gloating manner, in that I am a person who believes that rural areas need to be preserved and serviced. I guess it was my New York City upbringing that helps me to appreciate the importance of rural life.
Joined
·
5,295 Posts
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PosterBoy:
Very not cool though that both the new lines have slow system bus speeds, 100 MHz and 133Mhz. They could be, and should be faster. The G3 would perform a lot better with a faster bus. The G4 could use DDR RAM as well.
I am very happy about the new Graphics chips. as they didn't manage to beat Toshiba or Sony with a superdrive, but they beat compaq with the Radeon 9000, and its 64MB!
--PB<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I too would have expected a 167Mhz bus and DDR RAM in the Powerbook since they had to update the motherboard for the video graphics... but is it really a benefit or is it just an extra cost. I'm not sure how much DDR RAM really benefits the G4 with the large L3 DDR cache and the current architecture. Weren't there actually benchmarks that the Dual 1GHz DDR Powermac and the Dual 1GHz Quicksilver PowerMac didn't differ by any significant amount... not that I believe benchmarks all the time. On top of it the Powerbook only has a single G4 whereas the PowerMacs have a dual. Does a single G4 benefit from DDR RAM?
Besides, Apple's current implementation of DDR isn't a full implementation... why not wait until you can use DDR RAM all the way to the G4 and not just to the system controller.
Very not cool though that both the new lines have slow system bus speeds, 100 MHz and 133Mhz. They could be, and should be faster. The G3 would perform a lot better with a faster bus. The G4 could use DDR RAM as well.
I am very happy about the new Graphics chips. as they didn't manage to beat Toshiba or Sony with a superdrive, but they beat compaq with the Radeon 9000, and its 64MB!
--PB<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I too would have expected a 167Mhz bus and DDR RAM in the Powerbook since they had to update the motherboard for the video graphics... but is it really a benefit or is it just an extra cost. I'm not sure how much DDR RAM really benefits the G4 with the large L3 DDR cache and the current architecture. Weren't there actually benchmarks that the Dual 1GHz DDR Powermac and the Dual 1GHz Quicksilver PowerMac didn't differ by any significant amount... not that I believe benchmarks all the time. On top of it the Powerbook only has a single G4 whereas the PowerMacs have a dual. Does a single G4 benefit from DDR RAM?
Besides, Apple's current implementation of DDR isn't a full implementation... why not wait until you can use DDR RAM all the way to the G4 and not just to the system controller.
Joined
·
6,788 Posts
True, Apple's implementation of DDR on the PowerMac is a half implementation, until the bus from the Processor to the controller is made DDR you wont see as bug a benefit as you could.
A faster system bus, in any system, will make a huge difference though. Here is a good article from Ars Technica about bandwidth and latency, it does a pretty good job of explaining how a slow sytem bus is the bottleneck of every system (and that includes the newest P4s with a 533 DDR bus.
For a better example of how system bus can affect performance though, check out the results of a test done over at RAILHead Design a while back. He got a whole bunch of people to do a standard UNIX command, which tests OpenSSL Speed. The Test ignores multiple processors and Altivec (or Velocity Engine), so it gives a good idea of what bus can do for a system.
here are some excerpts:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
You can also see that the 667MHz PowerBook just barely eeked-out a couple more calculations-per-second than the 700MHz iMac, thanks to the PowerBook’s cache and bus.
It’s also noteworthy that the Dual DDR 1.0GHz G4 spanked the Dual non-DDR 1.0GHz. Of course, the SDRAM 1.0GHz has twice the L3 cache, but the DDR 1.0GHz has a faster bus…
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
So yes, system bus makes a big difference, more so than L3 cache in any event.
Another point worth mentioning (and this is Motorolas fault, not Apple's) is that the G4 is still using the .18 Micron process, and therefore they can't get anything bigger than 256k for the on chip L2 cache, which also takes away somewhat from the performance of the G4, not to mention that a .13 micron G4 would run cooler, and more efficiently regardless.
I am not saying this is the end of the world, but with P4s that have 533MHz system buses and Athlons that are running with a minimum or a 266 MHz DDR system bus, the 133 bus of the G4 systems seems a little pokey.
--PB
A faster system bus, in any system, will make a huge difference though. Here is a good article from Ars Technica about bandwidth and latency, it does a pretty good job of explaining how a slow sytem bus is the bottleneck of every system (and that includes the newest P4s with a 533 DDR bus.
For a better example of how system bus can affect performance though, check out the results of a test done over at RAILHead Design a while back. He got a whole bunch of people to do a standard UNIX command, which tests OpenSSL Speed. The Test ignores multiple processors and Altivec (or Velocity Engine), so it gives a good idea of what bus can do for a system.
here are some excerpts:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
You can also see that the 667MHz PowerBook just barely eeked-out a couple more calculations-per-second than the 700MHz iMac, thanks to the PowerBook’s cache and bus.
It’s also noteworthy that the Dual DDR 1.0GHz G4 spanked the Dual non-DDR 1.0GHz. Of course, the SDRAM 1.0GHz has twice the L3 cache, but the DDR 1.0GHz has a faster bus…
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
So yes, system bus makes a big difference, more so than L3 cache in any event.
Another point worth mentioning (and this is Motorolas fault, not Apple's) is that the G4 is still using the .18 Micron process, and therefore they can't get anything bigger than 256k for the on chip L2 cache, which also takes away somewhat from the performance of the G4, not to mention that a .13 micron G4 would run cooler, and more efficiently regardless.
I am not saying this is the end of the world, but with P4s that have 533MHz system buses and Athlons that are running with a minimum or a 266 MHz DDR system bus, the 133 bus of the G4 systems seems a little pokey.
--PB
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ron W:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PosterBoy:
[qb]
So yes, system bus makes a big difference, more so than L3 cache in any event.
--PB<HR></blockquote>
I do not agree with this and I do not think it is correct.
Ron[/QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I think it depends largely on what you are doing. If you are doing a lot of tasks on the same data, then cache will be a big deal. If you are working with a huge amount of data that won't fit in the cache, then it won't matter as much.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PosterBoy:
[qb]
So yes, system bus makes a big difference, more so than L3 cache in any event.
--PB<HR></blockquote>
I do not agree with this and I do not think it is correct.
Ron[/QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I think it depends largely on what you are doing. If you are doing a lot of tasks on the same data, then cache will be a big deal. If you are working with a huge amount of data that won't fit in the cache, then it won't matter as much.
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Join the discussion
