Quality difference display iBook vs Powerbook

I'm considering buying either an iBook 14" or a Powerbook 15". I like the Powerbook very much, but it's a bit too expensive for what you get. I like the iBook as well, but the display seems inferior to me. Am I correct that the 14" iBooks display is much less brighter and crisper than the display of the 15" Powerbook 15?
Martijn

You are correct, the quality of the Powerbook 15" screen is superior to the iBook. Also the 14" ibook has a resolution of 1024x768, while the current 15" Powerbook is 1440x960. You may also like the widescreen ratio better.
Having said all that carefully read these forums about the alternating line issue on the current hi-res 15" Powerbook, go look at one and make sure it won't bother you. If it does you may want to look at the previous generation 15" which has a lower resolution, but still superior display to the iBook (some may even argue superior to current generation 15").
Good luck deciding!

Similar Messages

Difference between iBook and Powerbook

Wondering if anybody could tell me the difference between the two besides the price.

The latest 12" iBooks have better performance than the 12" PBs in some areas. Obviously processor intensive apps will be faster on the PB. But the graphics card on the latest iBooks, even with only 32MB RAM is generally faster than the PB. HD is faster on PBs.
Checkout a comparison: http://macspeedzone.com/html/hardware/machine/comparison/portable/powerbook/inde x.shtml
Also wifi reception and battery life are better on the iBooks and you can increase RAM up to 1.5MB, instead of the 1.2MB on the PBs.
All in all, the 12" iBooks have a petter performance/price ratio. If you prefer the look, want a better keyboard, need the faster processor or 64MB RAM, then take the 12"PB.

Difference between ibook/powerbook NOW

well since now, all the books come standard with bluetooth, airport, 512 ram and g4 processor... coming to compare, wat are the MAJOR difference between ibook and powerbook currently? except some ggz changes in the processor speed, physical appearence , and back lit keyboard, wat other things make powerbook superior?
any replies wud be nice to have
regards
rishi

There r still many differenes..
1) I would count RESOLUTION as a BIG difference..1024x768 is certainly lesser than 1280x854..Leave aside professionals, I have friends, who cant even work on a 1024 screen..
2) FIREWIRE speed is the next thing..I have much data to be stored off the iBook, hence I would have been happier if i had Firewire 800..The transfer would have been definitely faster..
3) In my iBook, i miss the digital/analog(especially digital) audio, since i am a music freak..

Connecting an Apple 17" LCD Display to my PowerBook

Hello
I'm a complete novice at displays and I need some very basic advice!
I'm thinking of getting an Apple 17" LCD Display off eBay. I know I need a connector/adapter and these seem to be also available on eBay although they do seem to vary from about £4 to £30! Do I need other connectors - say for power? What are the combined power connectors I've seen? I want to link it to my 550 Powerbook Titanium.
Is there a specific connector I need? What do I need to look out for? Is there a reason why they vary in price? Is/was there an Apple part number I can look out for?
Also, can I use the same connector to link up a non Apple display?
What do people think about Formac flat panels?
Any thoughts on what's best?
Thanks Russ

Hi, Russ. The Apple Studio Display 17" LCD (with a
clear acrylic case) connects to a Mac through its ADC
port, which is designed to feed video data, USB, and
power to the display through a single cable. Your
550MHz Tibook has a VGA-out port, which does not
supply power to a connected display, nor does it
supply USB to enable the USB port(s) on the display.
Apple's system requirements for the Studio Display
include an ADC or DVI port on the computer driving
the display. Your Powerbook model has neither, so I
suspect it can't drive the Studio Display at all.
http://support.apple.com/specs/displays/AppleStudioD
isplay17LCD.html
All other LCD displays I've ever seen offered for
less than $2000 are distant runners-up to Apple's
LCDs in image quality. I don't recall whether I've
ever seen a Formac LCD, but I would expect it to be
comparable to the general run of the low-end LCD
marketplace, i.e., cheaper than Apple's offerings and
far inferior to them.
When actual selling prices for identical items on
Ebay vary widely, it generally reflects limited
demand, variable supply, and differences in patience
from one buyer to another. Someone who feels a need
to "buy it now" will gladly pay a premium; someone
who can take it or leave it this time and is happy to
wait for a better deal next time an identical item
comes up won't pay anywhere near as much.
Thanks eww. But can I get an adapter which plugs into my vga port and converts to dvi? As I said in my post, I'm a no-hoper on all this stuff but I'm sure I've seen somewhere that Powerbooks like mine can display through an external monitor.
I mentioned the 17" Apple display because I (like you) think they are the best. I'm not too bothered about the extra USB on the screen but what you say about power also is a problem Can I get a power supply as well as a connecting adapter?
PS - I was also hoping to be ale to use the Apple display to give me a better view when using my G3 iMac DVSE but it looks that's a gonner too!!
Russ

Print quality difference between iphoto and aperture...?

when ordering books, is there a print quality difference between using iPhoto and Aperture? or are they sent to the same lab?
it's possible i may have some setting wrong, but when i order a book using iphoto, i never really feel the quality is that great. it's good, i just feel it could be a lot better. the print quality sort of reminds me of newsprint, albeit high quality newsprint. similar sized prints made at home on my basic 3-in-1 printer look better.
thanks...

Previews are what you view on your display. When you import a photo into Aperture (and I'm pretty sure iPhoto as well), your computer automatically generates a preview for quick viewing. The original images are stored in your library, but it is the preview that you see.
In Aperture, you are able to set the size and quality of these previews. When sharing photos between Aperture and iPhoto, the process is as follows:
Let's say that your images are stored in Aperture, but you also want to be able to view them in iPhoto without taking up too much room on your hard drive. Essentially, if you were to import the originals into iPhoto as well, you would be storing two exact, yet separate copies of the same image on your hard drive. As you are aware, with large images (whether JPEG's, and especially RAW) this would put quite a tax on your storage capacity after not too long.
So, you have your images in one or the other (in this case Aperture), but you want to play around with them in iPhoto. What you can do, is open iPhoto, go to the File menu and then select, Show Aperture Library. This will open a window with all of the contents of your Aperture Library. You can then drag any images you want into iPhoto . The only thing is, you are not dragging the original JPEG's, but rather, the previews of those images. If you have those previews set to a lower quality (again for capacity concerns), you will only have lower quality and lower detailed images in iPhoto. These images might not be ideal, or even suitable for printing high quality prints. The previews that you generate in Aperture though can be adjusted to be extremely high quality with no size limits.
My thinking was that since you mentioned Aperture, it sounded like you had experience with working with it and with ordering a photo book through Aperture. I guess you were saying that you ordered via iPhoto, weren't happy with the quality and were wondering if Aperture created books were better.
Anyway, if this is the case, I cannot answer that for you. I have never ordered a book through Aperture. If the quality of your images is good, you should be able to get a decent product no matter where you order it from. There is not doubt that the materials used and the print shop that does the work makes a difference, but if your images are good, you should still get a decent product through iPhoto. Perhaps iPhoto isn't the way to go though if you have had poor experiences with them.
If you haven't used Aperture yet, I would highly recommend it though aside from the photo book aspect of this thread. It is a stellar product.
I hope this helps.
Message was edited by: macorin

Quality of Display - Mac Vs Windows

Am running WIndows 7 using bootcamp on m Mac and I have observed the difference in quality of display between Mac and Windows running on same machine. While working on Mac your eyes dont feel strained while in Windows its the other way round.
Also the text looks more crisp in Mac than in Windows. Any reason in difference, though both are running on same hardware.

On the thread subject, like to note that I ran across this issue a short while back and there is an impact due to the hardware being used while experimenting with my Late 2011 15" MBP with widescreen antiglare option. Installed the gfxCardStatus utility that lets you know which of the two GPUs is in use and/or force a specific mode.
Ran VMWare Fusion normally and determined that it caused a switch to the Radeon GPU, regardless of the VM settings. Then, since I needed to run the MBP on battery for an extended period, decided to force the Intel GPU and ran Fusion again. The hypervisor loudly complained about being "unable to provide adequate graphics support to the VM and how some graphics capabilities would be impacted in the guest system". On the Windows XP VM, when running lean on the Intel GPU, images such as the background, icons, etc., did seem granier than when on the Radeon GPU. Text was ok, but did feel as if something was a bit "off". Even though screen resolution was maintained at the native 1680x1050 at all times
But nothing crashed or burned, XP worked fine. And battery life was significantly extended.
Will experiment with VirtualBox & Win7.

LARGE GPU vs. CPU Export quality differences in MPEG2 (and others?)

I noticed that encoding to MPEG2 (for DVD's) using the CPU (through Media Encoder) produces much better results than does the MPEG2 codec the uses the GPU. Just finished a documentary and was preparing it for DVD. During fades to black, I would get grey macroblock errors on the first full-black frame. Also the encode quality was very poor (mosquito noise, lots of pixelation, and the macroblock errors). Rather than exporting directly from the timeline, I decided to queue to Media Encoder (which on CS6, only uses the CPU). While this increased the render time from 20 minutes up to 55 minutes (for a 57-minute show), the resultant file was of much higher quality (less mosquito noise, no macroblock errors, MUCH less pixelation). Both of these encodes had the exact same parameters. Exact. With the Media Encoder render, the CPU was maxed properly at 99% and the GPU was only handling the RT Effects from the timeline and such, varying in the low percentages of its utilization. With the GPU direct timeline render, the CPU was working around 40%-50% and the GPU was utilizing about 50%-88% of its potential.
I also tried test renders changing from single-pass to two-pass encoding. Absolutely no difference. Results were visually identical with same issues in GPU encode. Also tried the usual tests with switching on and off various features (maximum render quality, maximum depth, etc.)
I'm assuming, as with many other compression programs, there are different codecs because of the different processor architectures (cpu vs. gpu).
Has anyone else seen whether this has been resolved in later versions (CC+)? Because while I LOVE the low render times, the quality difference is HUGE (with MPEG2 for DVD).
Thanks!
Intel 3930K
16GB RAM
GTX680 2GB
CS6
Win7/64 SP1

Give us your screenshots to better understand

Exporting photos for UHDTV or Native 4K TV, what are the best settings ? (File: Quality File: Color Space, Image Sizing and resolution) Or in other words; How can I get the smallest files but keep good quality for display on new UHDTV

Exporting photos for UHDTV or Native 4K TV, what are the best settings ? (File: Quality File: Color Space, Image Sizing and resolution) Or in other words; How can I get the smallest files but keep good quality for display on new UHDTV

You're welcome, and thank you for the reply.
2) Yesterday I made the subclips with the In-Out Points and Command-U, the benefit is that I've seen the clip before naming it. Now I'm using markers, it's benefit is that I can write comment and (the later) clip name at once, the drawback is that I have to view to the next shot's beginning before knowing what the shot contains.
But now I found out that I can reconnect my clips independently to the format I converted the master clip to. I reconnected the media to the original AVI file and it worked, too! The more I work with, the more I'm sold on it... - although it doesn't seem to be able to read and use the date information within the DV AVI.
1) Ok, I tried something similar within FCE. Just worked, but the file size still remains. Which codec settings should I use? Is the export to DV in MOV with a quality of 75% acceptable for both file size and quality? Or would be encoding as H.264 with best quality an option for archiving, knowing that I have to convert it back to DV if I (maybe) wan't to use it for editing later? Or anything else?
Thank's in advance again,
André

Using a iMac as display for the Powerbook?

Can an iMAC computer be used as a display for the Powerbook laptop? Could I use the iMac keyboard plugged into the Powerbook and maybe the iMac mouse as well?

Does ScreenRecycler do what you want?
(43378)

Anyone editing FCP on a 12" iBook or Powerbook?

I'm looking at writing an article about "micro" HD production on the road - HD in a backpack, that sort of thing. Now, when I say production, I'm not talking very high end. I know the hardware isn't there yet! Think news, documentary or magazine show packages.
Anyway, I'm thinking about including a 12" Apple laptop in the mix and I was wondering if anyone has experience using either the iBook or Powerbook for HDV or MPEG4 editing. Is the small unit up to the job - internal drive speed sufficient, single Firewire port enough, etc.?
Also, any micro equipment you've been impressed with recently would help (mics, lights, anything at all)? Whatever it is, it has to be tiny.
Thanks

OK, I understand all that but I don't think it applies here. I'd probably be editing off the Powerbook's internal drive. I wouldn't be using the camera (it records video to an SD card) as a drive except in the initial import of files.
As far as RAM and "horsepower," while on the road I've been editing HDV pretty successfully on my 17" laptop and it's a 1G with only 512M of RAM.
http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/2003/08aug/features/cw_peteeditingalfresco.htm
I guess, ultimately, the point is not whether this would be an ideal production workflow but, could it be done in a pinch, like on a mountaintop or a sailboat.
Pete

Ibook or powerbook

hi everyone,
i am looking to buy an old ibook or powerbook but not sure what to get i am only going to be using it for playing music and the internet and msn, but what i want to no is , what i should get? And where can i get it from for cheap maybe a refurb or ex stock but if its an online store it needs to be able to ship to uk?
ok thanks for ur time
rob

The most common Quicktime 7.1 problem I've seen is someone's audio settings get messed up by a certain software. Go to the Audio Midi Setup application in Applications -> Utilities and see if your audio output has set for 96 Hz. If you drop it to 44.1 Hz, the audio issues some may have with Quicktime 7.1 would be fixed. If you are having other Quicktime issues, you may want to post to the Quicktime board your question by clicking on Post a New Topic at the beginning of:
http://discussions.apple.com/forum.jspa?forumID=932
rather than posting at the end of someone else's thread. That way you'll get a wider audience, and potentially someone who knows the answer.

Is it possible to mirror my macbook display onto a powerbook?

Hi. I'm wondering if it were possible to mirror my macbook display onto a powerbook such that videos watched on both screens would be in sync? What are the cables I might require for such a set-up or is there any software I might need to obtain? Thanks.

OnLocation from Adobe
HD Monitor
ScopeBox
VeeScope
among others

Transfer Netscape email from iBook to PowerBook

I am switching from using Netscape for email on a iBook G4 to a PowerBook G4. The iBook has Netscape 7.2 with bookmarks and emails. I can’t get Netscape on the PowerBook to recognize the iBook email files that I copied over. What I did was to copy over (via Firewire) the Mozilla folder in “computer”/”hard drive”/users/”name”/Library from iBook to PowerBook.
When I start Netscape on the PowerBook Netscape acts as if a new user profile is being set up and won’t find the user profile that was copied with the Mozilla folder. There must be another file that needs to be copied that I am missing. What is it?

Your profile is contained at Documents->Mozilla->Profiles. Here's an article on moving Netscape mail that may help, and it includes macs: http://www.bu.edu/pcsc/email/manage/newprogram.html#utility

Tape or Live Capture? Quality Difference?

I have never captured live footage direct from camera to computer. I have an opportunity to do so tomorrow on a 2-camera shoot. I have questions:
1) Is it possible to capture 2 firewire streams simultaneously in OnLocation or with some other program?
2) Is there a quality difference between live capture from an HDV camcorder and from a tape?
3) I have a Matrox MX02 Mini with which I can capture a stream via component HD. How does this compare quality-wise to HDV?
It is a long event - a bodybuilding contest (about 4 hours) I would love to save time not having to capture from tape afterwards, but wondering if the setup is worth it. I do not have a laptop, so I would bring my editing computer to the gig.

Hi(Bonjour)!
If you shooted in DV format (standard resolution) monitor your footage on a Standard tv monitor, not on a HD one.
Did you shoot with extended play activated ?
See this post:
http://discussions.apple.com/click.jspa?searchID=-1&messageID=3921401
Michel Boissonneault

Quality difference between picture taken with iPhone 4 and 4S when sent to iPad?

Is there quality difference in picture if it's taken with iPhone 4 and sent to iPad via iMessage or if it's taken with iPhone 4S? Or does the software compress the images so that it doesn't matter if the 4S has better camera because both will be compressed to equally small file size?
At least video quality is compressed so badly when sent via iMessage that it's unwatchable in iPad. Picture quality seems "ok" when sent from my iPhone 4, but I'm thining if 4S would be able to send images in better quality.

Yes, but iMessage will always "optimize" videos (= make the file size small and quality bad), does it make the same process for images too? If it does, then the slightly better camera doesn't matter because both will be compressed to same low quality file.

Quality difference display iBook vs Powerbook

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for