Apple... Potential Kindle Killer?

[Sonist]

Originally Posted by kamm

No, they are not....

Being an IT guy explains a lot about your animosity and obvious ignorance about all things Apple.

But, seriously, what do you base this statement on?

Here is a quote from a cnet review of the 17" Mac Book Pro:

"...With the GeForce 9600M GPU turned on, we got 4 hours and 14 minutes on our video playback battery drain test, which is very impressive for a desktop replacement. Switching the 9600M off added about 30 minutes."

Now, this a SEVENTEEN inch laptop, which can run video in a real-world test, for almost 5 hours! Not too shabby, in my book.

[wallcraft]

Originally Posted by Sonist

Now, this a SEVENTEEN inch laptop, which can run video in a real-world test, for almost 5 hours! Not too shabby, in my book.

Its weight is 6.6 lbs. The Mac may be relatively efficient for a desktop replacement laptop, but the way to tell is to compare to other laptops with the same battery size (or allow for the battery size difference). In the end, a larger battery is always needed for a longer battery life and batteries are heavy.

[brecklundin]

I will add something about my HP NX9420 (also a 17" laptop)...with a new main battery I easily get 4hrs use and that is with wifi and streaming video over 3G. When add the large secondary battery I get 12-16hrs run time...

Right now all of my batteries are a good 3-4yrs old so they have been in need of replacement for a couple years really. But I still get 4-6hrs with both batteries connected.

Mind this is NOT a modern LED backlit display either and I am almost always streaming something and use WIFI or a 3G dongle.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Sonist

Being an IT guy explains a lot about your animosity and obvious ignorance about all things Apple.

But, seriously, what do you base this statement on?

Here is a quote from a cnet review of the 17" Mac Book Pro:

"...With the GeForce 9600M GPU turned on, we got 4 hours and 14 minutes on our video playback battery drain test, which is very impressive for a desktop replacement. Switching the 9600M off added about 30 minutes."

Now, this a SEVENTEEN inch laptop, which can run video in a real-world test, for almost 5 hours! Not too shabby, in my book.

It doesn't take much CPU to run a video. So what are their power settings for this test?

[montsnmags]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

It doesn't take much CPU to run a video. So what are their power settings for this test?

The link in the above makes comparisons to other laptops with the battery drain test (a comparison might be more relevant than a single figure if we are making statements that Apple laptop battery life is "bad"), though I do not vouch for the particular laptops they compare them against. However, under that particular graph is another link to "find out more about how [they] test laptops". All if this may assist in you discovering whether the particular settings they use are specifically to your satisfaction.

Cheers,
Marc

[montsnmags]

Originally Posted by kamm

This was beaten to death zillion times last year, when it surfaced - it's a fake pic.

I don't believe the poster was presenting it as an actual pic of the device, but rather more as an "artist's rendering" (actually that of one of the Gizmodo "artists", I believe) of a potential device they might be enthused about.

Cheers,
Marc

[EowynCarter]

If it's from Apple, the battery life will be awful. Apple blew that big time with the iPod Touch and iPhone. Apple makes good looking hardware with poor performance in the real world.

That kind of comment is stupid. (And i don't like apple)

To go back on the topic i'll wait and see. Apple stuff is usually not the one to fit me. But then, maybe their reader will be an exception.

[Mitchll]

It's all a question of what suits the user's purpose. You can't argue with Apple's success. I would buy the "imedia 10" tablet" to supplement my sony reader for better pdf renditions and cancel my order for the Kindle DX

[Gideon]

Don't know what to tell your wife, but I'm writing on an aluminum Macbook (2009) and I generally averaging 3-4 hours with 4:15 being the big end.

[Mitchll]

The newest rumors put the issue into 2010:

Silicon Alley Insider reports on a note from Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster claiming that Apple's rumored "media pad" or tablet computer will not arrive until sometime in the first half of 2010. Munster also claims that the device will be more dramatically different from the iPhone and competing netbooks than most analysts and investors are expecting. The complexity of the operating system, reported to be a hybrid between the iPhone OS and full-blown Mac OS X, is apparently the primary factor holding up release of the device.
Don't get your hopes up for one of those devices this year, Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster writes in a note today. While Munster thinks Apple is indeed working on these sorts of devices -- running a third version of OS X "more robust" than the iPhone but optimized for multi-touch screens -- he thinks they're not going to launch this year, as some had predicted.

"We expect the development of such an OS to be underway currently, but its complexity, along with our conversations with a key company in the mobile space, leads us to believe it will not launch until CY10," Munster says.

AppleInsider provides additional detail on Munster's report, revealing that the tablet is expected to be priced in the $500-$700 range and thus bridging the gap between the iPod touch and the entry level MacBook. The tablet would utilize a display somewhere between 7- and 10-inches and would be well differentiated from existing netbook offerings, which Apple has repeatedly said it has no interest in duplicating due to the poor user experience such devices offer.
More specifically, the analyst said these investments will likely culminate with the launch of a touch-screen tablet with a display somewhere between 7- and 10-inches at a special event sometime in the first half of 2010. Such a move, he added, would be consistent with management's comments that Cupertino-based company has no interest in catering to the existing segment for "cheap" miniaturized notebooks and its spoken desire to differentiate in a market currently dominated by cramped computers with razor thin margins and a subpar user experience.

[kamm]

Originally Posted by Sonist

Being an IT guy explains a lot about your animosity and obvious ignorance about all things Apple.

Trust me, being the stereotypical Mac-fan clearly explains your attitude towards "IT guys" (whatever that means) - FYI I'm the chief of technology here, I built up this 150+ machines (both workstations rendering farm included), centralized HPC storage etc system architecture of ours from a 5-people-in-a-room-with-a-desktop level over the past 8-9 years (and yes, we do have some Mac Pros and Macbook Pros.)

But, seriously, what do you base this statement on?

Beyond decades of personal use (first Mac in my life was a IIc) it's based on my 10+ years real world professional experience of mine with all things Apple. You know, something that - based on your post - I bet you can't claim.

Here is a quote from a cnet review of the 17" Mac Book Pro:

"...With the GeForce 9600M GPU turned on, we got 4 hours and 14 minutes on our video playback battery drain test, which is very impressive for a desktop replacement. Switching the 9600M off added about 30 minutes."

Now, this a SEVENTEEN inch laptop, which can run video in a real-world test, for almost 5 hours! Not too shabby, in my book.

Yeah, because CNET has anything to do with "real-life".

You diss people who, unlike you, work in the field since yet praise some paid mouthpiece as "real world test"...


...get a clue.

[kamm]

Originally Posted by montsnmags

I don't believe the poster was presenting it as an actual pic of the device, but rather more as an "artist's rendering" (actually that of one of the Gizmodo "artists", I believe) of a potential device they might be enthused about.

Cheers,
Marc

I misunderstood his motives then, sorry.

[Gideon]

Charming. What a prince!

[kamm]

Originally Posted by Gideon

Don't know what to tell your wife, but I'm writing on an aluminum Macbook (2009) and I generally averaging 3-4 hours with 4:15 being the big end.

Alas, I can't speak for the 2009 models but older ones never scored this good unless you just put it down and didn't do anything on it.

[Xenophon]

Originally Posted by kamm

Trust me, being the stereotypical Mac-fan clearly explains your attitude towards "IT guys" (whatever that means) - FYI I'm the chief of technology here, I built up this 150+ machines (both workstations rendering farm included), centralized HPC storage etc system architecture of ours from a 5-people-in-a-room-with-a-desktop level over the past 8-9 years (and yes, we do have some Mac Pros and Macbook Pros.)



Beyond decades of personal use (first Mac in my life was a IIc) it's based on my 10+ years real world professional experience of mine with all things Apple. You know, something that - based on your post - I bet you can't claim.

[SNIP]
...get a clue.

Kamm:

I'll see your "10+ years real world professional experience of mine with all things Apple" and raise you a decade. Plus a Ph.D. (while we're tossing around semi-relevant credentials).

My personal experience of "IT guys" is that most of them (but not all, by any means) "know" a lot of stuff about the Mac -- both hardware and software -- that just aren't so.

Meanwhile, the computing facilities guys at my university tell me that they'd be just as happy if all their users got Macs instead of PCs. They find that they get 10x fewer support issues per user from the Mac folks than from the PC folks. (And about 4x fewer from the various Linux folks than from the PC folks.) Of course, we're not exactly the most usual set of users (Carnegie Mellon University's School of Computer Science -- in a 3-way tie for top program in the world) so your mileage may vary. But my experience, my extended family's experience, and the local "IT guys" experience seems to be quite different from yours.

So, with all due respect, perhaps you should "get a clue."

Xenophon