Final Mac Questions before I buy one.... (Got a new one...)

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: iamwiz82
mine was ~$1518 with airport extreme card through the Apple Developer Connection. Check on their website.

Hmmm... Almost sounds like the death of the iBook...

or the 12" pbook is an ibook+

I wouldnt call it that. It is in the iBook case, and some fo the hardware on in the inside is basically the same...

 

[LED]

AMDman12GHz...word with bytes states there is going to be 1 Major Spring drop in price coming ...Not a Mac man but respect the that world

 

[paralazarguer]

You dont know what your talking about. Its like I was like WOW I like these OSX Screenies. I actuallyy messed with my freind mac. In the applications I use It is worth it, the performance is great compared to my desktop as it is now.

Right...I don't know what I'm talking about...

I've only OWNED three macs in my lifetime one of which was very recently but YOU have both seen screen shots of OS X and played with it on your friend's mac. WOW! Idiot...

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: paralazarguer

You dont know what your talking about. Its like I was like WOW I like these OSX Screenies. I actuallyy messed with my freind mac. In the applications I use It is worth it, the performance is great compared to my desktop as it is now.

Right...I don't know what I'm talking about...

I've only OWNED three macs in my lifetime one of which was very recently but YOU have both seen screen shots of OS X and played with it on your friend's mac. WOW! Idiot...

Ive got a 500mhz iBook, and while it is sluggish (I wouldnt call it slow) it rocks. I have never seen a major manufacturer come out with an OS (and supporting applications) that fit *my* (pay attention to the last word, in fact I will repeat it: MY) needs.

Opinion only of course.

 

[Eug]

You might want to wait a month or two if you can. There are rumors that there will be a 15.4 version of the powerbook that includes the illuminated keyboard, airport extreme, Bluetooth, etc., but they are just rumors.

I wouldn't expect the 15.4" version (which probably will have a LOWER resolution than the 15.2" by the way) to ship until mid-summer.

A couple of reasons for this. I suspect they'll need a new chip design for major speed increases. The current chips are only 0.18 u after all. (Motorola still doesn't admit their G4 7455 chips are available past 1 GHz.) Also, they need an OS 9 bootable machine. The current 12" and 17" (which hasn't even shipped yet) can run OS 9 as Classic, but cannot boot into it.

Im leaning toward the 15" Superdrive now, and removing the superdrive, because the superdrive model is faster and has more ram etc...

You can configure it without a SuperDrive. The combo drive is $200 less.

Is there anything that you are going to do that is going to tax memory bandwidth. DDR is obviously preferable, but if all you are doing is word processing/web surfing/mp3 playing, I wouldn't worry about it.

The current Mac CPUs cannot use DDR. The 7455 G4 is incapable of double-pumped data access. DDR will only be useful in actions bypassing the CPU. So right now, DDR on a Mac (except for maybe the Xserve with certain applications) at best offers only a 1-2% speed increase. OTOH, the 7457-RM G4s are supposed to support DDR. Unfortunately, those are a while away. The next iteration of the chip is the 7457. It is 0.13 u like the 7457-RM, but with no DDR support. It is expected to be shipping by Q3.

Ive got a 500mhz iBook, and while it is sluggish (I wouldnt call it slow) it rocks.

I sold my iBook 600 (640 MB) because I found it slow. I bought a 1 GHz TiBook. It flies. Personally for OS X I tend to tell people to stick with an iBook 700 or up. But of course, YMMV.

mine was ~$1518 with airport extreme card through the Apple Developer Connection. Check on their website.

Yep. That deal is killer. Too bad I can't get in on it.

Don't get the superdrive, its overpriced and its only a 1x burner. Pay $150 and get a 4x burner for your PC. It will save you some cash.

Except that you lose the ability to use iDVD. iDVD 2 rox, and people are saying iDVD 3 is much better. (I don't have iDVD 3 yet.) iMovie 2 is pretty good. iMovie 3 is much more feature rich, but unfortunately it's not as stable as iMovie 2. Also, while the speed is not bad on my TiBook, iBook users are ripping their hair out because of the speed. Both are significantly better than most PC consumer programs though, and I've seen no match for iDVD 2 yet, much less iDVD 3. Because of the uber-cool DVD menu themes, iDVD 3 needs something like 2.5 GB just for basic installation. :Q

 

[Spicedaddy]

I dont want a Lap Warmer, They run hot, arnt stable, weight 50000 Pounds and are BIG and bulky.

Fujitsu S

Fujitsu P2000

Dell X200

IBM Thinkpad X

Gateway 200

Sony VX89

Sony V505A

Toshiba Portege 2010

Toshiba Portege 4010

A bunch of others...


Damn those big, bulky, unstable, hot-running laptops!

 

[paralazarguer]

Damn those big, bulky, unstable, hot-running laptops!

Yeah, I HATE all of the ignorance that abounds about Macs. Here are some truths:

1. Mac OSX is not as stable as Windows XP. This is pretty sad considering that it's running on Apple's own hardware with a very limited software library. All three of my old macs which ran os8, os9.1, and the newest which came with OSX were very unstable. The OSX machine required reboots at least once every two days. Not necessarily because of locks but because of unco-operative behaviour which only a reboot would fix. I have NEVER had windows XP crash on me with a stable hardware base. My main system currently has an uptime of about 8 months. I can't say the same for that mac.

2. The hardware is NOT of better quality. Did you know that most of apple's laptops are made by ECS? (case and motherboard) That's right, one of the crappiest, lowest quality PC laptop and mobo makers. No, they don't run that cool. A mobile P3 or centrino platform is just as cool. A crusoe or C3 platform is much cooler and will still run circles around the Mac. Then there's being able to run common software. That ibook can look as purty as it wants but if it can't run my C&C Generals, it's just an ornament.

3. Macs are far less advanced. They can't even really use DDR. They only support ATA100, no 133 or serial ATA. AGP8? Forget about it. They have no DX9 functionality and most people who use Macs in the content creation sector are FORCED to use OS9. That's right, an OS without protected memory ala windows 3.11. The reason? OSX is lacking many features such as low latency access to audio hardware. Pro tools is nice but it can't run under OSX well. Funny how windows XP has no problem with that (anymore.)

 

[AmdInside]

I was close to buying a 12" Powerbook but decided against it for two reasons:

1)Hard drive is very slow

2)Laptop only has a single mouse button

The laptop really takes a long time to boot up and shut down. Maybe a faster hard drive wouldn't help much but I really wish for other stuff that they would have given the option for 5400RPM hard drives. As for mouse, I am sooooo much more productive with the alt-mouse button. I need my second mouse button. If it were a desktop, it wouldn't be an issue because I could plug in an eternal mouse but I can't easily on a laptop. Its dumb because MacOSX offers native support for two-button mice.

 

[jcovercash]

Originally posted by: paralazarguer

Damn those big, bulky, unstable, hot-running laptops!

Yeah, I HATE all of the ignorance that abounds about Macs.


The majarity of PC laptops are big and bulky I didnt say 100% of them were. To get the power that Im going to get out of the mac I would need one of the heavier desktop replacement laptops.

The majority of the software has been ported to the Mac.


For what Im using it for the Mac will BE PREFECT. Although you may not like it, it suits my needs 100%......


Yes I have messed with my friends ibook, He restored it and started it from stratch for me so I could mess with all the features and set it up myself. While Taking a little while to get used to it didnt take long to get it down pat. It was very stable. Did you ever think that maybe you dont know what your doing? Maybe thats y it didnt work right for you. Your just a Mac Basher, and you will find some smart ass remark for everything that I can say good about them. Im not a Mac fanboy nor am I a PC fanboy, I can respect superior products though.


Josh

 

[jcovercash]

Originally posted by: AmdInside
I was close to buying a 12" Powerbook but decided against it for two reasons:

1)Hard drive is very slow

2)Laptop only has a single mouse button

The laptop really takes a long time to boot up and shut down. Maybe a faster hard drive wouldn't help much but I really wish for other stuff that they would have given the option for 5400RPM hard drives. As for mouse, I am sooooo much more productive with the alt-mouse button. I need my second mouse button. If it were a desktop, it wouldn't be an issue because I could plug in an eternal mouse but I can't easily on a laptop. Its dumb because MacOSX offers native support for two-button mice.

#1. You could always sell the HD in FS/FT and Buy a Faster one.
#2. What about a USB Mouse??? How hard is that too hook up?


Josh

 

[0roo0roo]

super drive is nice.


eh, i droll over the rotating/fading desktops osx runs in the background, so cool. screensavers are nice too windows xp so ugly... so ugly.

don't listen to the poor pc user that can't afford any better. if they had money they'd just buy both and shutup

 

[paralazarguer]

To get the power that Im going to get out of the mac I would need one of the heavier desktop replacement laptops.

OMFG You actually think that a Mac is fast? I hate it break it to 'ya man but the fastest macs lose to midrange PCs in every benchmark. Gaming, video editing, 3d rendering, PHOTOSHOP, everything.

 

[paralazarguer]

super drive is nice.

Yeah, an you can get one for the PC too. Except the one for the PC from Sony supports both DVD-rw and DVD+rw. DVD+RW is being adopted by microsoft as the standard so we'll see soon what will happen to the DVD-rw that apple's currently using...

 

[jcovercash]

Originally posted by: paralazarguer

To get the power that Im going to get out of the mac I would need one of the heavier desktop replacement laptops.

OMFG You actually think that a Mac is fast? I hate it break it to 'ya man but the fastest macs lose to midrange PCs in every benchmark. Gaming, video editing, 3d rendering, PHOTOSHOP, everything.

You wanna show me benchmarks from a Non-Biased site that shows a midrange (P3 - Athlon) beating a G4?? And benchmarks and just that though Benchmarks, unless you get some actual real application benchmarks.

Josh

 

[paralazarguer]

amazingly clueless. Alright, What the heck.
Why don't you check out these other anandtech threads (and there are more-I just did a three second search and picked off some of the easiest ones) where they link to all sorts of benches where the macs get slaughtered.
This thread is called mac vs PC for photoshop
this one's called another mac vs. PC compare
and this one's about the newest and still incredibly slow powermacs.
Enjoy

 

[Barnaby W. Füi]

Originally posted by: paralazarguer
amazingly clueless. Alright, What the heck.
Why don't you check out these other anandtech threads (and there are more-I just did a three second search and picked off some of the easiest ones) where they link to all sorts of benches where the macs get slaughtered.
This thread is called mac vs PC for photoshop
this one's called another mac vs. PC compare
and this one's about the newest and still incredibly slow powermacs.
Enjoy

Good thing he'll be using it for something other than benchmarks!

 

[jcovercash]

Originally posted by: paralazarguer
amazingly clueless. Alright, What the heck.
Why don't you check out these other anandtech threads (and there are more-I just did a three second search and picked off some of the easiest ones) where they link to all sorts of benches where the macs get slaughtered.
This thread is called mac vs PC for photoshop
this one's called another mac vs. PC compare
and this one's about the newest and still incredibly slow powermacs.
Enjoy

Your first link is just a flame war macs against pc like this one.
The second link while providing benches puts a tibook against an alienware 3.06 ghz p4 laptop, which uses a desktop processor, this is NOWHERE NEAR lowend..... Its heavy its bulky and its ugly
Whats the point of that third link again?

You are bashing the processor speed, the processor may only be 1ghz but its not like a 1ghz amd chip or anything like that. Please dont reply to my thread anymore as I dont feel like hearing you argue with me, if you dont like macs start your own thread and let me come crap in it.

Josh

 

[i3rYs0n]

AIght, macs are cool, period. They look good, and they ARE fast. And provided with suficient amount of ram lets say 512, osx wont bogg down like my (window xp) 1.33 ghz machine does while running IE, kazaa, and trillian (also 512 mb)

Bryson

 

[jcovercash]

Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey

Originally posted by: paralazarguer
amazingly clueless. Alright, What the heck.
Why don't you check out these other anandtech threads (and there are more-I just did a three second search and picked off some of the easiest ones) where they link to all sorts of benches where the macs get slaughtered.
This thread is called mac vs PC for photoshop
this one's called another mac vs. PC compare
and this one's about the newest and still incredibly slow powermacs.
Enjoy

Good thing he'll be using it for something other than benchmarks!

I dont know if that was a positive response or not, But I could really care less about benchmarks, Like I said in the other post THEIR JUST BENCHMARKs, Im worried about real world performace, I asked a few simple questions and I just wanted those answered I didnt want every Mac basher in this place coming outta the woodwork to come crap in my thread :|

Josh

 

[iamwiz82]

Originally posted by: paralazarguer
amazingly clueless. Alright, What the heck.
Why don't you check out these other anandtech threads (and there are more-I just did a three second search and picked off some of the easiest ones) where they link to all sorts of benches where the macs get slaughtered.
This thread is called mac vs PC for photoshop
this one's called another mac vs. PC compare
and this one's about the newest and still incredibly slow powermacs.
Enjoy

gee, what a suprise, a PC website with pro-pc benchmarking.

look, a 867mhz G4 is nearly as good as a 2.0GHZ P4. . A P4 2.0ghz is only 34% faster in those tests.

BTW, i have yet to see OSX crash and it has been up and running for 4 days now without reboot. I did have iswipe crash, though.

 

[jcovercash]

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: paralazarguer
amazingly clueless. Alright, What the heck.
Why don't you check out these other anandtech threads (and there are more-I just did a three second search and picked off some of the easiest ones) where they link to all sorts of benches where the macs get slaughtered.
This thread is called mac vs PC for photoshop
this one's called another mac vs. PC compare
and this one's about the newest and still incredibly slow powermacs.
Enjoy

gee, what a suprise, a PC website with pro-pc benchmarking.

look, a 867mhz G4 is nearly as good as a 2.0GHZ P4. . A P4 2.0ghz is only 34% faster in those tests.

BTW, i have yet to see OSX crash and it has been up and running for 4 days now without reboot. I did have iswipe crash, though.

Thanks for the link I like this.

The dark side of benchmarking computers is that anyone can put together a scenario in which one computer is shown to dominate another -- aka selective benchmarking. Only with well-written and equally optimized applications for differing platforms can one hope to come away with any meaningful results.

This particular benchmark focused on photo editing. Tests like these are not the best representation of overall performance. Nor do they accurately depict the end-user's experience.

 

[ViRGE]

Just to answer your tech questions:

The cache and DDR is negligable. The 15" will be faster simply because of the faster CPU. As for graphics, the 9000 is a full-fleged DDR DX8 renderer, the 420 Go is a SDR DX7 renderer, so the 9000 would be the more powerful choice.

As for the fellow talking about Superdrives, the PB of course uses the thin ones built for laptops; those are only availible at 1x as far as I know.

 

[jcovercash]

Originally posted by: ViRGE
Just to answer your tech questions:

The cache and DDR is negligable. The 15" will be faster simply because of the faster CPU. As for graphics, the 9000 is a full-fleged DDR DX8 renderer, the 420 Go is a SDR DX7 renderer, so the 9000 would be the more powerful choice.

As for the fellow talking about Superdrives, the PB of course uses the thin ones built for laptops; those are only availible at 1x as far as I know.

Well as It looks now I think I have moved to the slower 867Mhz PB with a SuperDrive, I dont think I need the 1Ghz speed,

I really doubt I will notice a difference.


Josh

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: ViRGE
Just to answer your tech questions:

The cache and DDR is negligable. The 15" will be faster simply because of the faster CPU. As for graphics, the 9000 is a full-fleged DDR DX8 renderer, the 420 Go is a SDR DX7 renderer, so the 9000 would be the more powerful choice.

As for the fellow talking about Superdrives, the PB of course uses the thin ones built for laptops; those are only availible at 1x as far as I know.

I will disagree with you on only one point. The L3 cache. There were some benchmarks run comparing the PM with 2mB L3 cache to the ones with 1mB L3 cache and the difference in L3 cache made a big difference in the speed of the system.

Will the x86 flamers please leave the thread?

 

[Eug]

1. Mac OSX is not as stable as Windows XP. This is pretty sad considering that it's running on Apple's own hardware with a very limited software library. All three of my old macs which ran os8, os9.1, and the newest which came with OSX were very unstable. The OSX machine required reboots at least once every two days. Not necessarily because of locks but because of unco-operative behaviour which only a reboot would fix. I have NEVER had windows XP crash on me with a stable hardware base. My main system currently has an uptime of about 8 months. I can't say the same for that mac.

I don't reboot very often with either my XP box or my Mac. If anything I reboot my XP box more. XP's support of Firewire is not as robust as OS X's it seems. Hardware:

Celeron 1.4 GHz 512 MB Radeon 9100 64 MB
TiBook 1 GHz 768 MB Radeon 9000 64 MB

I don't reboot my NT box much either, but then again, I don't do much with it. No Firewire or even USB support. I like XP but I really can't stand NT though. (I'm forced to use NT at work. It got so bad that I built a second XP box for use at work too, with my own money.)