“Once again, the buzz says its end is nigh. Too bad Jobs & Co. is too busy satisfying consumers to go along with the doomsayers”. Read the article at BusinessWeek. “Until recently, very few users and essentially no enterprises would give any thought to Apple as a server vendor. Small wonder, since Apple hadn’t been trying to compete seriously in the server market. Things have changed.” Read the article at ZDNews. Also, Apple Computer on Wednesday updated its entire portable line, most notably adding its first PowerBook capable of burning DVDs and a faster iBook.
Why Apple Keeps Clicking and OS X in the Enterprise
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
This $1299 iBook looks like a good buy. It only needs a memory upgrade (128 MB is too low for OSX) but overall is a good buy for what it is. Only other problem is that this is a G3 CPU, and Apple has a tradition of stopping supporting older CPUs/architectures when you don’t really expect it. Other than that, go for it!
Again (I said that in the past too), don’t fall for the 14″ (and more expensive)iBook, as both the 14″ and the 12.1″ iBook have the same resolution (1024×768) so it doesn’t make much sense to buy the bigger one. I mean, we have here a SONY Vaio with only a 10.4″ LCD and runs 1024×768 very nicely. So, the 12.1″ is enough for this resolution!
$3039 for a TiBook with a 1GHz G4, 1GB of RAM, a Radeon 9000, a 60GB HDD, integrated gigabit ethernet/Airport, and an integrated DVD RECORDER? Seems like a helluva deal if you ask me… I dare anyone here to try to find a similarly priced x86 laptop with all those features.
now I really have to decide… sony R505, iBook, or TiBook
once I get my full time position, it will be a very hard decision to make! if only I had to decide now… =D
AU/X didn’t make it, NeXT didn’t make it and neither will OS X.
People who want PC class Unix servers will go for Linux, BSD, Solaris etc…
People who want easy to use GUI on their servers will go for Windows 2000 or .Net or even Linux nowadays.
People who what enterprise class boxes will go for SUN, HP, IBM etc… Hopefully soon Windows .Net!
This is because they all run on faster, inexpensive, flexible, OPEN and widely available Intel servers.
ciao
yc
just because your BeOS is dead don’t go trolling.
Eugenia, could you please explain a little more about the 12″ iBook versus the 14″ one? i’m considering buying an iBook soon, and i automatically went for the 14″ one. if i could get by with a 12″ i could spend that extra couple hundred bucks on something else, like a external firewire hard drive enclosure
granted i don’t know as much about laptop LCD’s as i do about desktop moniters, but wouldn’t the same rule apply here? that the bigger the moniter the less eye strain there would be? i would be using this iBook as my primary computer, spending a considerable amount of time on it. wouldn’t a 14″ display @ 1024×768 be alot better than a 12″ at the same resolution?
Nathan
I’m using a 14″ iBook and I’d much rather use this than the 12″ even if it is the same resolution.
The OS is definately sluggish at times but thats the OSs fault not the CPU, and it’s not raw power, it’s responsiveness.
That said it’s an unbarably slow system like some would have us believe.
Overall though it’s a very nice machine and a very nice OS. Even if you don’t like the look of the GUI it has to be the most polished GUI around by far.
And then there’s he iApps…
>that the bigger the moniter the less eye strain there would be?
Sure, but I have seen the iBook’s LCD quality and it is a pretty good one. The 12.1″ is enough for 1024×768 (don’t forget that the 12.1″ is a “real” size, while on CRTs is always an inch smaller of what they advertise, because of CRT’s border).
As I said, I have here a Sony laptop with only 10.4″ and the same resolution, and quality is great. So the 12.1″ is really enough for this resolution. The 14″ is just a way for Apple to make more money, it brings absolutely nothing new. If the 14″ had a bigger resolution, I might be suggesting it, but it doesn’t.
Also, do not forget that MacOSX’s font is pretty big by default, so there is no problem at all with the 12.1. Also, the 12.1 iBook is smaller and lighter overall, which is a plus.
> I’m using a 14″ iBook and I’d much rather use this than the 12″ even if it is the same resolution.
Why, because you already bought it? 😉
Well, aside from a bigger screen, the thing that’d pull me in for the 14″ model would be the longer battery life.
Eugenia I tried out both at the Apple store and if I was going to buy one right now I would go for the bigger screen at a slightly higher price.
No matter what resolution you are running at the bigger screen for legibility and usability is important to me and I feel for a lot of users. BTW, in the Apple store’s defense they mentioned the exact same thing about the resolution so they definetly did NOT try to push me to the bigger screen.
On the memory issue, Apple stores are running a special where they give you more memory on any iBook purchase at least in the VA Tysons Corner store.
http://a772.g.akamai.net/7/772/51/8aa878c5667954/www.apple.com/
ibook/images/index_2up08072002.jpg
Check out their sizes. For the pretty much the same machine, you get a bigger sized laptop, while the whole point of the ibook is to have a small, light and cheap laptop. The 12.1″ model is closer to this ideal. And the fact that they have the same resolution, for me, the 12.1″ is better one. In this case the “Hey Joe, buy the bigger one” (when we are talking about anything hardware) does not apply.
I bought the 12″ iBook (I admit that I was influenced by comments on osnews
) and use it as my primary computer. I’ve had it for a couple of months now and so far, I’ve had no regrets regarding the screen size (no regrets regarding anything actually). Upgrade RAM to at least 256 MB and I’ll have a nice little Mac…
not every one is a teenager or twentysomething – that portion of the population that remembers being 40 cann appreciate the 14 screen at 1024×768 — usability and legibility are worth more than an illegible screen.
>usability and legibility are worth more than an illegible screen.
Sure. But my point is that the 12.1 screen is really enough for everyone. I am not 20 years old either. I am 29 now, and since last April, I have to use glasses when using computers. But the 12.1″ iBook I used (it was my friend’s) is fine even without my glasses. Even our 10.4 VAIO is fine.
If you got the money, go for the TiBook, if you don’t have so much money, get the $1299 iBook with more memory. I believe it is a good buy.
a friend of mine wants to buy a laptop soon and was asking me for help on choosing one.
seems like OS X would be a nice platform for her, but I don’t know much about apple hardware, since I’ve always used PCs.
how do the G3 and G4 compare with the P4 and the Athlon?
also, what type of RAM do the iBook and the PowerBook use? PC133?
how nice are the iBook and PowerBook speakers and built-in sound cards?
also, how do their keyboards compare to vaio keyboards?
(yes, I actually don’t really know much about notebook hardware in general either
)
>how do the G3 and G4 compare with the P4 and the Athlon?
They are considerably slower than the current modern x86 CPUs. Check our archives for benchmarks between x86 and PPC CPUs.
But the main point of Apple hardware is to have nice designed hardware, nice cases and a unique OS.
I was on Apple’s webpage this morning looking at the new ibooks (I can’t wait for mine to come in) and was almost ready to give up the Combo drive and 100mhz for the cheapest ibook, but then I knowticed that the $999 model only has 16 megs of video ram and the next model up has 32. I was under the impression that OS X needs a ton of video ram, so I think I may go with the step up model. Any sugestions?
I’ll say this bluntly. I own two G4’s (400mhz and dual 800mhz) and I also own a G3 (400mhz), I have a 5 liscense volume for Jaguar and I notice quite a considerable speed increase between the G3 using Jaguar and the G4 using Jaguar, both the G3 and the G4 have a Radeon PCI, which I have hacked for QE. And they both run on the same bus (100mhz) the motherboards are actually quite identical, and they both have 512mb of RAM. The G4 outperforms the G3 in OS X quite considerably even in Jaguar, so my tip to anyone out there looking to buy a mac is, IF YOU HAVE THE MONEY GO G4. You won’t regret it, you’ll end up wanting to buy a G4 upgrade in the end, so you might as well put down the money now.
Oh and I didn’t even bother comparing them to the Dual G4 because they can’t compete, the PowerPC 7455 chip is amazing and I believe that the L3 cache makes this computer fly. Well back to Photoshop!
The low end is not good enough. This is why I suggested the $1299. For $300 more, you get stuff that really deserve that extra $300:
10 GB more hard drive, 16 MB more graphics memory (yes, Quartz Extreme loves more gfx memory), *combo* drive (DVD/CD-RW instead of CD-ROM) and 100 Mhz extra MHz (800 vs 700 Mhz)!!
These additions for the $1299 model, WELL WORTH the additional $300. Just make sure you add it more memory, and you are all set!
well after reading everyone’s comments i have to say i am still leaning towards the 14″. to me, it’s worth the extra cash to have a bigger screen.
as to the G3 vs G4 debate….i don’t know jack about mac’s. that said i always figured the G4 to be a pentium 3 or 4 and G3 to be a celeron. now i know they aren’t that at all, but i always figured that was a good way to decribe the speed differences between them to someone who knew less about mac’s that i do.
is that a fair comparsion? also, believe me if i had the cash, i’d go powerbook. but as it is i can’t afford one so i’m going iBook
Nathan
Yes the G3 and G4 are slower then current P4s. But a 800Mhz G3 is still about the same speed as a 1.6GHz P4. The topic is about laptops, and since puting anything larger then a 1.6GHz P4 in a laptop is stupid (no batter life do to the power consumtpion and fan). The iBooks and tiBooks are very simular to the P4 line.
On the desktop models, the dual 1.25GHz G4 is in line with a top of the line P4 system; it could also be slightly faster.
As for the G3 vs G4, they are the same chip except the G4 includes some multimedia extentions. Jaguar is optimized to use the multimedia extentions and will always be faster on the G4 then the G3. However, if your programs don’t use the extentions, then the G3 & G4 at the same clock speed are equal in benchmarking.
>a 800Mhz G3 is still about the same speed as a 1.6GHz P4.
This is absolutely not the case.
>On the desktop models, the dual 1.25GHz G4 is in line with a top of the line P4 system; it could also be slightly faster.
This is not the case either. Please stop spreading FUD and zealotry and look at benchmarks.
>except the G4 includes some multimedia extentions.
So do the pentiums/II/III. With MMX, SSE and SSE II.
Joe Powers, I agree with you completely, but most people these days are multimedia freaks, that’s why I recommend the G4 plus, they are one step up the food chain from being cut off by apple’s support.
Anyways, my one worry is that I’ll end up having to purchase 10.3, I don’t want to spend even $50 for an upgrade in six months. I mean Microsoft and all it’s business wrong doings don’t expect people to purchase the next biggest operating system from them every two years, it’s been 4 years and Microsoft finally cut off support to Windows 98 users.
how heavy is too heavy?
Larry Setzler said BSD administration makes Linux seem almost as easy as a Mac!
battery life. The 14.1 unit has a larger battery, which will power it at the most (per Apple’s page) 1 more hour than the 12.1 unit.
>The 14.1 unit has a larger battery
Yes, it has a larger battery because the machine is larger. So, depends what you want.
so lets say that tomorrow Apple comes out with OS-X 11 and totally drops support for 10.x.
now lets say i don’t think that version 11 is worth it and i want to keep 10.x and all of it’s patches & updates that Apple has released for it. is there someway i could burn those updates to a CD that i have d/l’d from Apple’s site? that way if my hard drive failed i could reinstall from CD and then apply the patches from CD, so if/when Apple takes the patches off thier site i would still have a copy.
is this possible? or are the patches like those for windows, integrated into windows so that you have to d/l them?
Nathan
Most of the Apple patches are available from http://www.versiontracker.com/macosx
OSX uses the online system to update the OS, like WindowsUpdate does. But most of the times, Versiontracker has the files themselves for individual downloading.
We have the 12″ iBook and it’s fine.It has 16 MB VRAM. We run it 16 bit color and that helps a lot. You don’t want this if you want big multi-media power – it’s meant to be light and easy to carry around.
I’ve used a 14″ model. It’s also really nice, but is pretty big. in fact, I’d only get a 14″ if I was going to use it almost as a desktop replacement. So, if it’s going to be your main computer, it would make sense to get it – and get all the features you can. But, as Eugenia said, the 12″ is very good, especially if your intent is going on the road or constant transport.
Hmmm, I take it that Vince is an OS X fan. Right?
LOL You Apple Fans are soooo sensitive & defensive!
Well, I am really not trolling! You must admit that what I wrote is true and makes sense.
Only Mac shops which are usually small (under 500 seats) will use these servers because they already have an investment in Macs.
The big firms with tens or hundreds of thousands of seats will use Windows on their PCs and flirt with Linux. As long as PC class Macs servers are imprisoned on proprietary XServe hardware, they ain’t goin’ to make it big no matter how many infomercials Steve makes.
It just ain’t gonna happen. Linux and BSD can provide everything that XServe provides on Faster, less expensive Intel Servers.
You see, even as a dead OS, the Desktop BeOS on Intel has a better chance of making it in the enterprise than OS X on the proprietary Apple XServe hardware
Would you happen to have XServe shipment numbers?
ciao
yc
Nathan: The patches are downloadable either as discrete .dmg disk image files or incorporated directly through software update. Your choice.
Joe Powers: FWIW, my personal experience is that, for the G3 range of CPUs at least, the Mac CPUs lag a little behind their Intel equivalents. I have a Wallstreet 300MHz and an AMD K6-2 333MHz PC laptop. The K6 is somewhat slower than the equivalent Intel chip, around 20% or so. Both laptops have 4MB of VRAM. The Mac cannot keep up with regard to Multimedia – more dropped frames and sound drop-outs. I was very disappointed, especially considering the Wallstreet cost me two and a half times as much as the PC laptop and I have not felt tempted to upgrade my Mac since.
I would pick the 12 inch version. The beauty of the ibook is its small footprint and practicality. It is a great value for travellers and workers on the move.
As far as processor power is concerned, of course the Tibook is much faster than the ibook but the speed difference is really not relevant unless you have to deal with CG rendering / high end compositing.
As far as comparing it to a PC laptop, the Macs will give you a much longer battery life. Some PC laptops might be slighly faster that the top of the line Tibook, but once again, you will pay a big premium in term of battery life, and I am puzzled why you would need that kind of speed on a laptop anyway. A 1ghz g4 is plenty of speed for everything you would need to do. All the laptops I dealt with in heavy production tend to overheat when used for long hours of heavy computational tasks, then the laptops reduce the processor speed/performance to cool down, so if you need to massively crunch numbers get a desktop.
My 2c
have you ever known somebody that liked something that you liked…..and really hated it because that person was such a PITA it ruined it for you?
yes i like beos and linux.
and yes you are that person.
goood day.
Yes, in fact, if you read the articles, it said sales of the X Serv have quadrupled. LOL, Apple isn’t trying to overthrow the big server companies, they’re trying to get a quality product out that will serve a purpose for particular niches. In a way, Apple can’t lose – to go from zero server sales to a tiny share is good – they will make money because it’s a good server and there will be some who want it.
YC: The XServe is definitely attracting a lot of attention in the corporate marketspace. Don’t simply diss a product because of established status quo or conventional wisdom. While it’s not the fastest server out there nor necessarily the best choice in every case, Apple has produced an extremely value-priced server with above-par price/performance ratio.
You want XServer sales number? How about from Gartner Group?
http://www3.gartner.com/5_about/press_releases/2002_10/pr20021028b….
Scroll down the page a bit. As of Q3 2002, Apple is now the 5th largest server vendor in the U.S. That’s pretty good since Apple only introduced in Q2.
Granted, the absolute numbers are still small (5700 units sold in Q3), but the growth is an astounding 273.8%. Wait a couple more quarters and we’ll see what the XServer sales numbers will be. Note: the Gartner numbers for Apple server sales probably also include Apple’s non-XServer server machines, although they are probably miniscule (the 1525 units listed for Apple in Q3 2001, when the XServer didn’t exist).
My feeling is that while Apple will never displace #1 Dell from the server market, Apple will quickly overtake the likes of #4 Sun and maybe even #3 IBM.
And BTW, Intel servers are not “less expensive” once you factor in the multi-thousand dollar Windows licenses. XServe, on the other hand, offers an unlimited seat license for $999 – a fraction of the cost of a Windows license.
Also for one’s reference, XServe has been getting rave reviews from those sources that have traditionally avoided Apple products:
PC Magazine: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,575556,00.asp“>Apple
Federal Computer Week: http://www.fcw.com/fcw/articles/2002/1014/tec-apple-10-14-02.asp“&g…
InfoWorld: http://www.infoworld.com/articles/ne/xml/02/10/21/021021nexserve.xm…
Apple has the makings of a hit product that is very attractive once you evaluate it on its technical merits.
I’ve got one, and I’ve never been happier, it’s so small and light and it is in essence real portable computer. For those who can’t choose which one to buy I would say go for the cheapest one. CPU can be overclocked in software (800 MHz iBooks probably are), use extra $300 to buy 5,25″ external firewire enclosure, cdrw/dvd combo drive, 512 MB of memory and you can probably fit extra h/d for that money. The only thing better in higher end models is 32 MB of video ram, but if you don’t intend to use multiple monitors with quartz extreme enabled you don’t really need that.
Apologies in advance about the badly formatted URLs in my post above. I missed the part about “Leave spaces around URLs to autoparse.” 😛
“Would you happen to have XServe shipment numbers?”
No I wouldn’t but I don’t think you have proof that everyones mentality is that the Xserve is only for mac shops either. For some companies, having another corporate entitity to rely or blame for software problems is something that they want. You can’t really do that with a Free(beer) Linux Download Distro. Not to mention the Licensing is a hell of a lot more competetive than microsofts.
The big firms with tens or hundreds of thousands of seats will use Windows on their PCs and flirt with Linux.
Look Windows, isnt that that OS that crashes every time ? or needs reboots every now and then for no logical reason ?
I dont want too flame, my point is that it doesnt really matter what you sell or why you sell it. Just aslong it sells and if you market it good it will even sell better and trust me if it aint worth the money damn sales have tripled over night. One year everyone uses brand X and the next year Brand Y, no reasons asked its just how markets work i guess…
Apple has a good shot at the market again, i think.
Quazion
Quazion:
I haven’t seen Win2k Servers crash yet…
as for them crashing, could it be bad ASP code, bad SQL, etc etc? I mean… the same can be done one any server…
try to write a recursive shell script that continues to increase a filesize until the file system gets filled, and you’ll see linux (or OS X for that matter) freeze…
I think people who keep on saying “Windows crashes” are stuck in Win98 – ME range. Give credit where it’s due…
Personally, I stick with linux on servers, but that’s because I’ve been administering it for a while…
yc:
I agree that generic Intel solution with BSD/Linux will be cheap. However, don’t diss the Xserv just yet… Have you seen the Sun Cobalt line of Server Appliances? Until recently, their highest end housed an AMD K6-2 3D (or whatever it was called)… The Celestix Aries server appliance until recently used a whooping Geode… they all have their uses…
Man, can we please quit bashing everything just because they’re not your religion? I use Windows, Linux, OpenBSD, and OS X, and they all do good in what they are all good at.
Every tried playing the latest games on a Mac? There aren’t… neither are there for BSD/Linux. Care to build an entire network topology for cheap? Try it with anything other than BSD/Linux… and it’ll cost you a fortune… and want a nice Unix with a usable interface? can’t find anything close to OS X…
sheesh, sound like I need to get some sleep…
what else do these X-Serves run, besides OS X…i’m sure they run Linux and NetBSD, how about OpenBSD and FreeBSD?
also, i how does linux performance compare on typical intel servers vs. X-Serve?
just curious how geek worthy these baby’s are
-bytes256
FreeBSD: not yet.
hmmphhh,
Please stop being a whimp!
How difficult is it to skip a post written by someone you dislike (for what ever reason).
My initials are on every post that I write, if you hate my guts then don’t read my posts. Period!
ciao
yc
as far as I am concerned I will purchase a new 1.8Ghz P4 notebook for $1,200-$1,400 over a 800Mhz G4 ibook for $1,600 once I add everything I want (on either’s web config).
Eugenia has it right. The 12 inch ibook is sharp, lighter in weight, and thus easier to handle. The 14 inch version doesn’t add anything bt size and weight.
And as far as “eyes” go, I’m over 70 and don’t find the “large” type is necessary!!
blind as a bloody bat. plus the battery life rocks, 4 hours playing mp3s or dvd, better if I turn off the lights and dim the screen.
But how’s THIS for a deal?
http://www.naturetech.com.tw/promo.htm
the 14 might be worth it in another sense … right now apple is running a promo for “doubling” your ram for $40 … the 14″ version will get 640m ram under this scheme .. its a rather good deal atm.
*j*
>>except the G4 includes some multimedia extentions.
>So do the pentiums/II/III. With MMX, SSE and SSE II.
This is one of the hard to explain points of the G3/G4. There is not nearly as much difference between them as there is between a Celeron and a P3/P4 (or between a P3 and a P4). The biggest difference is an extra that preforms functions like MMX, SSE1/2.
With only that minor of a difference you would think it wouldn’t matter, except there is only one technology here (Altivec in the G4), and a company optomising for that (Apple). Microsoft would be crazy to highly optomize their operating system and programs for MMX, SSE, and SSE II. Microsoft would be in the position of deciding how much to support each technology to maximize their return on investment. Considering their software ships compiler optomized for size rather than speed, and targeting 386 and up, how much do you think supporting the new hot technology matters to them?
Apple supports two chips and one vector unit, and supports them well. Microsoft supports only what it has to.
What does this mean? There is a much larger performance difference between the G3 and G4 than two comparable x86 chips.
i was just looking at different laptops (compaq, ibm, dell) just that afternoon. looking at the apple site, the ibooks didn’t seem worth the money anymore compared to the other brands. then at around 11 (my local time) the site was updated! i’m definitely getting the ibook now. it’s the same price as the compaq presario 910us and dell inspiron 4150. except the compaq has only a 16mb ati radeon SHARED memory. plus i’ve had 3 bad experiences with compaq already. with dell, it’s the same, except i also only get 16mb, and without a combo drive.
who ever said macs were expensive? probably the pirates who don’t want to buy software and can’t find mac warez.
Like I said before, OSX is getting there slowly.
Enterprises (at least serious ones) DO like their journaling and snapshots and clustering etc.
Which OSX doesn’t have yet.
A new kernel is a must, too – the mach underpinnings aren’t helping performance much but that’s a big, big change.
The option to turn off eyecandy is a must too but Apple ain’t too keen on doing it.
The ibook is not bad for the money but if you factor in the unoptimized OS (yes, I tried Jaguar on an ibook) it can get prettty slow sometimes. The G4 is not badly priced for what it is though (a weird statement when talking about Apple…) if you compare it with similar x86 laptops.
D
I don’t think Mach is responsible for OS X’s slowness.
OS X does not simply use a “Mach Kernel”, it uses a _modified_ Mach 3.0 kernel running in the same address space as the BSD processes. XNU (the OS X kernel) is not pure Mach, nor is it a pure microkernel. So the old arguments “Mach is from the 80’s” and “Microkernels are slow” don’t necessarily apply here.
Aqua on the otherhand likely is a huge performance problem.
See the main page with the PowerBook ad. Notice “Whistler” is the name of the DVD. Interesting isn’t it? A movie named after a Windows codename. Pure coincidence or subtle hints of a major conspiracy.
Bascule: $3039 for a TiBook with a 1GHz G4, 1GB of RAM, a Radeon 9000, a 60GB HDD, integrated gigabit ethernet/Airport, and an integrated DVD RECORDER?
You have to upgrade the RAM, and get a cheaper video card, but other than that the Vaio can pretty much cost the same. The video card’s inferiority could easily be redeemed for the screen size. And of course, no built in Wi-Fi support, but that’s a cheap upgrade. But then you get a much faster processor (so overall, it is pretty much the same value).
But just give it a few months, PC OEMs would make that PowerBook the most overpriced laptop you have ever seen. But right now, I wish I had the money to buy this machine.
yc: AU/X didn’t make it, NeXT didn’t make it and neither will OS X.
AU/X died the same reason why Xenix from Microsoft died. NeXT isn’t part of Apple until recently and their target market has never been the corporate market.
yc: People who what enterprise class boxes will go for SUN, HP, IBM etc… Hopefully soon Windows .Net!
From what I hear from the beta testers, you need all the hope in the world, bro.
Nathan: Eugenia, could you please explain a little more about the 12″ iBook versus the 14″ one?
Well, I’m not Eugenia, but I think the 14″ is crap, compared to other 14″ laptops. The main problem with it is that the keyboard doesn’t maximize the amount of space it could use.
NeoWolf: Well, aside from a bigger screen, the thing that’d pull me in for the 14″ model would be the longer battery life.
Why… just get a better batery (just like Apple did for the 14″ model).
Eugenia: I am 29 now, and since last April, I have to use glasses when using computers.
One of the few SF Bay residence at this age to admit their age in a public place.
kublai: also, what type of RAM do the iBook and the PowerBook use? PC133?
With a 100mhz bus, I’m guesing PC100.
I was under the impression that OS X needs a ton of video ram, so I think I may go with the step up model.
Depending on the resolution, it doesn’t need 128mb of VRAM.
Joe Power: Yes the G3 and G4 are slower then current P4s. But a 800Mhz G3 is still about the same speed as a 1.6GHz P4.
If a 400Mhz G4 can’t come even close to my 800Mhz Pentium III, I doubt that.
Eugenia: So do the pentiums/II/III. With MMX, SSE and SSE II.
Cool down, girl. He was comparing a G3 to a G4, not a Pentium to a G4.
jbett: it’s been 4 years and Microsoft finally cut off support to Windows 98 users.
Officially, that’s next year. But in reality, this is pretty much the situation.
yc: You see, even as a dead OS, the Desktop BeOS on Intel has a better chance of making it in the enterprise than OS X on the proprietary Apple XServe hardware
No, I would say otherwise. OS X has better networking support than BeOS, multi-user support, apps like Office – stuff BeOS DON’T have. Sure OS X don’t stand chance against Linux and Windows, but it has a better chance against BeOS.
No offence.
Satchel Buddah: As far as comparing it to a PC laptop, the Macs will give you a much longer battery life.
But then again, if you spend as much money as on the TiBook, the tables can be turn. Okay, okay, I admit, Apple laptops use less batery power, but not because of the processor.
But generally, in real life test, the batery life in PCs are sufficient. Especially with Windows XP whose battery manager is very very good. I manage to take six hours to type in a report on Word, all without a recharge. Of course, I stop when the machine forced me into hibernation.
paul: The XServe is definitely attracting a lot of attention in the corporate marketspace.
From the articles I have read with analysis statements, most of the people buying these are studios that uses Macs and for web servers that stream Quicktime.
Definately not corporate stuff. Xserve does have one advantage, ease of use. It might hit off in the low end market, but since when did the low end market buy rackmount servers?
paul: My feeling is that while Apple will never displace #1 Dell from the server market, Apple will quickly overtake the likes of #4 Sun and maybe even #3 IBM.
In certain geographical areas Dell rules this area, but it is mostly HP and Compaq combined (30% is hard to beat). As for Suns, maybe their Intel machines. For the IBMs, again maybe their low end Intel machines.
Quarizon: Look Windows, isnt that that OS that crashes every time ? or needs reboots every now and then for no logical reason ?
Windows doesn’t crash all that often, unless it is running a cluster of about 10,000 machines. The reboots it needs is all fine in most cases (for the low end market where Windows really shines its best). Besides, IIRC, .NET Server don’t need anymore reboots…
Corey: But how’s THIS for a deal?
Okay, there goes my arguement that Sparcs can’t be used in normal desktops. But notice how the slim laptop is as thick as the thickest Dell? 🙂 Plus, how is the heat emmision and the battery life?
Accroading to Gartner, BTW, Apple is the fifth, true. But notice how far it lags behind the forth. 6.9 from Sun vs. 1.2 from Apple. Besides, it is a estimate (didn’t catch that word, no?), not actually non-fiction figures.
By rajan r (IP: 219.93.197.—) – Posted on 2002-11-07 16:04:26
“See the main page with the PowerBook ad. Notice “Whistler” is the name of the DVD. Interesting isn’t it? A movie named after a Windows codename. Pure coincidence or subtle hints of a major conspiracy.”
Whistler is a name of a Ski Mountain, that is why it is named Winter in Whistler
I knew that. Longhorn, IIRC, is a lounge near there…
Why do people always exaggerate so much when it comes to g3/g4 performance?
I’ve owned 2 new macs (sold 1, trying really hard to sell the other still) and plenty of x86 hardware. I would have to honestly say the I don’t think the G4 has (what feels like) any more than a 100-150mhz advantage over a Pentium III at the same clockspeed. I’m basing this on how gentoo linux performed doing day-to-day tasks on both systems. The systems I played with were a 700mhz G4 imac and 700mhz pIII with the same bus speed, amount of ram , and videocard specs. The PIII also has a 15″ LCD.
I rarely saw any speed advantage on the mac running linux, or very little in some situations, certainly not enough to justify the insane price difference.
I ran X on both of the systems using the framebuffer driver, just to be fair(since x86 has the “nvidia” driver”).
I also took advantage of any GCC optimizations on either system. I used Gentoo 1.4_rc1 for all testing.
I won’t even bother commenting on how painfully slow Mac OS X Jaguar can become once you actually start doing real work with it. This is why I did my speed comparisons with Linux.
I think in the future i’ll try to find some real linux benchmarks to use in comparing the two systems. I’m judging performance here strictly on how each system “feels”.
P.S Anyone want to buy a new iMac for really cheap? hehe
Trev
Forgot to mention I also had to put a 5400rpm HD in the PIII to lower it down to iMac’s specs.
Trev
I ordered a G3 700Mhz iBook with Radeon Mobility (16MB) and AirPort card last Saturday. According to the Apple Store website it is “being assembled”. It cost £1428.08 excluding tax. The new G3 800Mhz with 32MB graphics and an Airport card costs £1427.99 <sigh>
There are 3 computers in my house.
A PIII 750/512 running W98
A Powermac g4 DP867/768 running 10.2
An iBook g3 600/640 running 10.2
They all seem about the same in terms of speed for what I do.
Despite the fact that the iBook only has 8mb video ram I have noticed no signigicant slow down in video performance. And in the DP 867 I’ve yet to see anything special with QE.
The iBook is not a full featured desktop replacement machine. It’s a great liteweight write papers and surf the web computer.
If you don’t plan to do video editing or serious graphics crunching, the iBook is a fine computer.
“The option to turn off eyecandy is a must too but Apple ain’t too keen on doing it.”
it’s called >console
Does the G3/4 “declock” itself to save battery like AMD/INTEL CPUs do? How do the Apple Notebooks get to their longer battery life? Just a question from a Linux guy thinking about forking out some cash for a TiBook.