Titanium PowerBook owners: do you have anything to add that I missed in my review?
You must be logged in to the O'Reilly Network to post a talkback.

Showing messages 1 through 14 of 14.

• Apple Laptop Keyboards Unsuitable for Unix Users
  2002-10-09 23:44:50  anonymous2 [Reply | View]
  
  

  Apple laptops are effectively unusable for unix users.
  
  

  I am a long-time Unix user. That means I need to have the Ctrl key to the left of the A key. This is a genuine need, not merely a want; it is based upon ergonomics. The Ctrl key is heavily used in unix, and it must be easily accessable. It cannot be off in the lower left corner of the keyboard where it is difficult to get at, and where it distorts the position of your left hand such that you can't easily type other keys while holding the Ctrl key down.
  
  

  Apple desktop keyboards are now all USB. They are all OK. The CapsLock key can be re-mapped into a Ctrl key.
  
  

  Unfortunately, even in this modern age, all Apple laptops have built-in ADB keyboards. The ADB keyboard is broken-by-design. It is, in general, not possible to remap the CapsLock key into a Ctrl key.
  
  

  There are some exceptions, but they are horrible kludges. They are
  horrible kludges because the original design of the ADB keyboard was a horrible kludge. The correct solution would be for Apple to re-design their laptop motherboards to use built-in USB keyboards. This hasn't happened yet. If you run Linux, use Debian's solution. For Mac OS X users, uControl works. There are no solutions (that I know of) for either NetBSD or OpenBSD. Please note once again that the "solutions" above are in fact kludges, because of the original bad design of the ADB keyboard.
  
  

  Apple is (currently) ignoring Unix users! This is not merely speculation on my part. In an on-going email exchange I am having with an Apple employee (whom I won't name) in their marketing department, the Apple marketing person directly stated to me that Apple was catering to their historic Mac customers, and is purposely ignoring the Unix market. He also claimed that Apple would soon start paying more attention to the Unix market. I won't hold my breath. Apple has been ignoring Unix users for more than 12 years. I expect that trend to continue. (Also note that my Apple contact indicated that Macs would never ship with a 3-button mouse, even though Apple intended to port almost all X-window software and deliver it either on a CD/DVD or installed directly on each Mac's hard drive. How Unix friendly is a 1-button mouse with X programs that often require 3 buttons?)
  
  

  Apple has now lost two opportunities to sell me hardware. I really wanted an Apple laptop for their superior battery life, and for the PowerPC with Altivec CPU. (The Altivec is vastly superior to the x86 line for DSP.) Because I can't live with the broken-by-design built-in ADB keyboard in all Apple laptops, Sony and IBM sold me laptops instead. If Apple fixes this problem, they will sell me a PowerBook next year; if they don't, I'll still be running OpenBSD on x86 hardware, and wishing I could use a Mac.
  

• Apple Laptop Keyboards Unsuitable for Unix Users
  2003-11-05 01:37:42  anonymous2 [Reply | View]
  
  
  it s been a year since this article was posted. i wonder if apple has fixed this. the tech specs for the new powerbooks don t saw whether the keyboards are USB or ADB.

• Trackpad advice, from a veteran.
  2001-11-30 23:55:03  sixcolors [Reply | View]
  
  
  One of the greatest things about the Mac track pad is how well the click and click-drag functions of the track pad work (Like tapping the pad not the button) by not using the button you can gain quite a bit of speed and versitility. Turn them on in the control panel... Click twice fast to drag!!! Also know how the pointer jumps across the screen when you two finger it... Comming from a windows world (or an un-adventureous mac one) this can seam to be a bad thing, but try this... Mouse on the top right need to click on something in the bottom left? Place one finger in the top right on the track pad QUICKLY place the other finger in the bottom left while at the same time lifting the first finger... Now you see how good it can be :)
  
  I still don't have one (STARVING STUDENT COMPLEX) but I have saved up most of it and will buy one after the next notebook favored conferance (MWToyko)

• Trackpad advice, from a veteran.
  2001-11-30 23:53:09  sixcolors [Reply | View]
  
  
  One of the greatest things about the Mac track pad is how well the click and click-drag functions of the track pad work (Like tapping the pad not the button) by not using the button you can gain quite a bit of speed and versitility. Turn thOne of the greatest things about the Mac track pad is how well the click and click-drag functions of the track pad work (Like tapping the pad not the button) by not using the button you can gain quite a bit of speed and versitility. Turn them on in the control panel... Click twice fast to drag!!! Also know how the pointer jumps across the screen when you two finger it... Comming from a windows world (or an un-adventureous mac one) this can seam to be a bad thing, but try this... Mouse on the top right need to click on something in the bottom left? Place one finger in the top right on the track pad QUICKLY place the other finger in the bottom left while at the same time lifting the first finger... Now you see how good it can be :)
  
  I still don't have one (STARVING STUDENT COMPLEX) but I have saved up most of it and will buy one after the next notebook favored conferance (MWToyko)em on in the control panel... Click twice fast to drag!!! Also know how the pointer jumps across the screen when you two finger it... Comming from a windows world (or an un-adventureous mac one) this can seam to be a bad thing, but try this... Mouse on the top right need to click on something in the bottom left? Place one finger in the top right on the track pad QUICKLY place the other finger in the bottom left while at the same time lifting the first finger... Now you see how good it can be :)
  
  I still don't have one (STARVING STUDENT COMPLEX) but I have saved up most of it and will buy one after the next notebook favored conferance (MWToyko)

• I am DELL user now converted.
  2001-11-29 13:21:40  fernieds [Reply | View]
  
  
  I use a 756Mhz DELL laptop running windows for
  software developement at work. The G4 Ti makes
  it feel like a piece of junk. OS X with its
  UNIX inteface is a great refuge from the clumsy
  windows enviornment.
  
  This is a must look for all those who are
  brain washed by the microsoft marketing
  campaign.

• RPM: Wrong
  2001-11-28 13:53:08  freeideas [Reply | View]
  
  
  It works the other way. The smaller the HD, the less diameter, the *LESS* data passes under the reader. Given the same data density, a smaller HD will have to spin *FASTER* to read data at the same rate as a larger drive.
  
  (this is in response to earlier postings, not the article)
• RPM: Wrong
  2001-11-29 10:19:08  salamander_ [Reply | View]
  
  
  You claim is correct, but I wasn't comparing disks of the same data density, I was comparing disks of the same data capacity, i.e. the smaller disk has a higher data density.
  
  Having said that, I've realised that my point is only accurate if the track widths remain the same on both disks, which probably isn't the case.
  
  If you picture the platter of a 3.5" disk, you could compact its data into the centre 2.5" by moving all the tracks closer together, or by putting more bits into each of the tracks that lie inside the centre 2.5".
  
  If the former method is used, each track has the same number of bits in it as before. Each head reads the same number of bits per rotation, so the required RPM is the same for both disks.
  
  If the latter method is used, each track has more bits in it. Each head reads more bits per rotation, so the required RPM is lower for the smaller, denser disk.
  
  It is likely that disk capacities are increased by both narrowing the track widths and packing more data into each track, so the 72% I quoted is inaccurate. However, I'd submit that it might be easier to put more bits in each track than to increase the track count, since the latter requires making the heads narrower.
  
  Whatever the balance between the two methods, 2.5" disks of the same capacity only need to spin somewhere between 72 and 100% the speed of 3.5" disks to maintain the same data rate. There's also the added bonus of the heads not needing to move as far when switching tracks.
  
  So I'm sorry for overstating the difference in my first post, but I stand by my claim that larger disks of the same capacity need a higher RPM to maintain the same performance.
• RPM: Wrong
  2001-12-02 01:50:31  rwagoner [Reply | View]
  
  
  It sounds as if you are only thinking of data transfer rates at the extreme ends of the platters. But the 3.5 inch uses an area that includes all the area of the 2.5 inch drive; combined with the fact that 3.5 inch drives are generally larger in capacity than 2.5 inch drives (hence the density should be similar), you end up back at the point where the faster angular velocity equates to a faster data rate.
  
  Additionally, the linear velocity at 3.5 inches is far greater than at 2.5 inches at the same angular velocity (RPM).So other than head movement, assuming similar densities (and I am in no way a hard drive expert so this assumption may be wrong), the 3.5 inch drive is again faster.
• RPM: Wrong (Let's get this straight)
  2001-11-28 22:17:23  Derrick Story | [Reply | View]
  
  
  OK, we have two opposite views on this subject. My personal experience, as I stated in the article, is that laptop drives "seem" slower that their desktop counterparts, even when other system elements are more or less equal.
  
  But I am not a hard drive expert. I am however, curioius about this subject now that it is raised.
  
  So, what is it? Smaller HDs faster or slower? And more importantly, why?

• Hard Disk RPM
  2001-11-27 01:56:17  salamander_ [Reply | View]
  
  
  Remember that laptop hard disks are 2.5" in diameter, whereas desktop hard disks are 3.5". Since circumference is proportional to diameter, you only need to spin the smaller disk at 2.5/3.5, or 72% the speed of the faster disk to get the data passing beneath the heads at the same speed. You can therefore expect 5400rpm 2.5" drives to to have better performance on average than 7200rpm 3.5" drives of the same capacity.
  
  Of course this ignores many issues such as the number of platters, the chipset, the bus bandwidth, caching and so on. But you should keep it in mind when making RPM comparisons between disks of different sizes.
• Hard Disk RPM
  2001-11-27 07:42:55  Derrick Story | [Reply | View]
  
  
  Excellent point! If you're correct, and I'm guessing that you are, then that's a pretty strong argument for the upgrade to the 5400 rpm disk for power users.

• Bye-bye Windows Thanks to TiBook
  2001-11-26 08:40:53  ethanbrand [Reply | View]
  
  
  Add me to the list: I'm a Mac convert thanks to OS X and my TiBook (first generation 400mhz model). I won't go into the OS X side of that story, but I will add a few things about the TiBook that weren't mentioned in the article.
  
  Battery Life - I've been using laptops for over six years now, and one thing I found is that laptop batteries are the bane of all business travelers. The Makers advertise long battery lives; the Users get frustrated when reality sets in. Every Windows laptop I have ever used loses a significant amount of battery life in the first six months and the new slim-style notebooks are notorious for short and shrinking battery life. Not the TiBook. While I have never had the 5 hours advertised, I have had consistent 2-3 hour life ("Forrest Gump" stops just a few minutes before the ending), and that's with using battery power day-in and day-out. Maybe it's OS X's power management, but the TiBook battery is excellent compared to the many Windows laptops I've used.
  
  Ports - On a slim-style laptop, it's uncommon to find two USB ports, a Firewire port, AND an S-video out port. Enough said.
  
  Shhhhh! - This was mentioned in the article, but it's worth repeating. The TiBook is quiet compared to other laptops I've used. The fan is loud, but so is every other laptop fan I've heard and the TiBook's doesn't turn on very often.
  
  Keyboard - The article gave the keyboard a thumbs up, but failed to mention one of the reasons why - the wide screen. Not only is the keyboard firm, comfortable, etc, but the wide screen forces a wide base, which allows for keys that you can actually get your fingers on. Unfortunately, the move to smaller Windows laptops has often meant smaller keyboard keys.
  
  I have to give the speakers a thumbs-down. They don't offer much low-frequency punch and grate on my ears after short listening experiences. Thankfully, the headphone jack is in a convenient location.
  
  I have heard gripes about Airport performance, but have yet to really experience it as I have known wireless access with just my TiBook.
  
  Overall, I love the TiBook's design and performance - but mostly the design.
  
  Kevin
• Bye-bye Windows Thanks to TiBook (Fan Follow-up)
  2001-11-26 08:50:13  Derrick Story | [Reply | View]
  
  
  I want to add a few thoughts about the fan, because it's different that what I've experienced in other laptops.
  
  First of all, the fan doesn't run all the time; it only kicks on when the processor begins to get hot. It's much like the cooling fan in my car that remains idle until the guage hits about three quarters high.
  
  I like this design because the constant hum of most fans is annoying -- second only to grinding hard drives. The TiBook fan only kicks in a couple times during an average two-hour session. And when things cool off, it turns off.
  
  This is another of the "nice touches" that make the TiBook a well-thought-out work of hardware.

• Track Pad Tip
  2001-11-21 09:47:38  Derrick Story | [Reply | View]
  
  
  Some early mail that I've received reminded me of a helpful track pad tip that I use, but forgot to include in the article.
  
  In the System Preferences, click on the "Mouse" icon, and then click on the "Trackpad" tab, then check the box, "Ignor Trackpad while typing."
  
  This doesn't solve the problem completely, but it sure helps.