Slashdot Mirror
12" Powerbook: Slick and Sexy, But Not Without Issues
Gentu writes "Two very good reviews on the 12" Powerbook have been published today. The first review can be found at the Washington Post and is very positive but not very thorough, while the second one found at OSNews is an in-depth review of the popular Mac laptop, tackling down many issues that future purchasers should be aware of. 'The new 12" Powerbook is nothing more but an iBook on steroids with a G4 in it' OSNews concludes, but the overall read is very interesting."
This is true: Motorola has, over the past couple of years, been moving their focus more and more away from Apple, and desktop systems in general, to focus on the embedded market. It is largely because of this that this year's last models of PowerMacs (that is, the ones that will come out late this year) will sport IBM PowerPC 970 chips. IBM won't be leaving the desktop/server market anytime soon, and it looks like they are now forming a partnership with Apple that will benefit them both. (How weird is that? IBM and Apple...)
Dan Aris
Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.
One of his complaints was the lack of cleartype under max ox x. If I recall correctly, cleatype is subpixel rendering, and that has been supported since Jaguar was released. In fact, it's the primary reason I upgraded from 10.1.5.
(How weird is that? IBM and Apple...)
How about "not at all?" From the beginning of PowerPC Macs, the PowerPC was the domain of "AIM": Apple, IBM, Motorola. They all had a formal agreement of some kind regarding the chip's development. I think it kind of fell apart, probably around when Motorola developed Altivec, but IBM has never stopped making PowerPC chips for themselves, Apple, and others. I think IBM makes all the G3 chips Apple buys today. IBM has long done a better job of keeping up with advancements in chip production and keeping yields at a higher level than Motorola. Higher yields means cheaper and faster chips. Unfortunately Apple needs Altivec and Motorola hasn't been sharing.
Use of the IBM 970 chip is still rumor, one I haven't really paid attention to though. Has Motorola finally licensed Altivec to IBM or did IBM make their own version of it? You can't have two different kinds of G4s so if the IBM chip doesn't have Altivec it would have to be called something else ("G5?") and the G4 would have to replace the G3 in the iBooks (or, as someone else mentions, the iBook dies in favor of the 12" PowerBook). Even so, if there's a new Altivec-like chip feature, it'll take a long time for apps to be updated to take advantage of it. Apple would use it immediately, followed quickly by Adobe Photoshop, but many apps would wait until their next upgrade cycle.
I don't agree with all the complaints in the OSNews review. To wit:
I've compiled a fair bit of code on it and it seems fairly quick--at least as fast as my PIII 933 Desktop--and has reasonable battery life, 3-4 hours while compiling. Haven't really had time to benchmark the compile times on my own code. I'm quite happy with it.
Bottom line, if you want something really portable, I'd go for it. If you're looking for a desktop replacement, I'd look at the bigger ones.
Final note: get more ram. I've noticed that the front left corner does get hot, but I have a feeling it might be related to HDD usage.
{Only the Combo Drive comparison makes sense, and I'm only trying to list differences.}
12" Powerbook
867MHz G4
256K L2 cache
133MHz Bus
256MB
40GB Ultra ATA/100
NVIDIA GeForce4 420 (32MB DDR)
-- Dual Display & Video Mirroring Airport Extreme Ready
Bluetooth Built-in
$1799
12.1" iBook
800 MHz G3
512K L2 cache
100Mhz Bus
30GB Ultra ATA Drive
ATI Radeon 7500 (32MB)
-- Video Airport Ready
$1299
So the $500 extra upfront gets a faster processor, more RAM, larger & possibly faster HD, possibly faster video card with dual display ability, Airport Extreme ready, and built in Bluetooth.
Conclusion: there are differences. The question for prospective buyers is would they use the differences. For the record, upgrading the iBook memory to 256 is $50 and the hard drive to 40GB is $100, so the price difference for the other differences is $350.
On a side note, I personally want the SuperDrive, which isn't available on an iBook (most likely a G4 is required).
R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before? B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
As for the heat, it's definitely not "among the hottest around" as the OSNews article claims - for one it's a lot less hot than the older TiBooks IMHO. He says he suspects his lower RAM configuration could be to blame. I suspect his suspicion is right - 256MB just isn't realistic for OS X. Furthermore, it's hard to hear (or even feel) the drive spin, so VM activity can easily go unnoticed.
I don't agree with his criticism of the display either. Admittedly I'm not too picky in this area, but I just don't see this supposedly outrageous difference in quality between my 17" Apple Studio Display and the PowerBook's display. Besides, it's hard to buy into the disappointment, since all it takes is a quick trip to the store to check it out (at least for people who don't buy computers just to review them ;-)
The rest of the criticism goes right at the price differentiation variables: "maxes out at 640MB", "no L3 cache", "not a 1GHz processor", "screen is only 12"" etc etc... Well guess what, that's why it's the $1799 model instead of the $3299 model... that's half as much plus $150. The better comparison is between the older $2299-$2799 TiBook inventory that Apple still officially carries and the 12". Would you rather have:
- A 15.2" screen, DVI connector, and Titanium enclosure, or
- A later gen with a faster bus, DDR RAM, Bluetooth, 802.11g compatibility, and $500 in your pocket
I don't but I recently "switched" to a 12" ibook when my Vaio was stolen - it's the best upgrade ever (I am also a student and my course requires a decent implementation of Java, plus I like UNIX tools - the terminal is my most used app). I feel slightly annoyed that the 12" powerbook costs the same as my iBook and only 3 months later but hey - that's progress for ya.
I did however get to play with one of the 12" powerbooks in my local Apple reseller the other day and they are *much* faster - go for it. OS-X is a reasonably "nice" version of UNIX (I normally use NetBSD) and it has the infinite advantage over Linux in that things (hardware) just work rather than having to spend hours compiling kernel modules when you really need to be working.
To be honest, I'm a little confused by the article. The reviewer seemed to be criticsing the machine for being what it is - a smaller, lighter, cut-down version of the 15" powerbook or in his words an iBook with a G4. He seemed to somehow think Apple had a magic "make it smaller" device so that they could cram a 15" laptop into a 12" one. Also he seemd to think that Apple should use two different 12" displays on their different laptops. I certainly haven't had any of the display problems he claims with my iBook...
The whole point these machines is that they are ultra-portable (I carry mine everywhere) and in fact the only thing that worries me slightly is that the iBook is not a rugged as I would like, but the powerbook solves this by being made of Aluminium.
The die-hard mac users are right you know - it is a better world...