iBook G4 benchmarked against hackintosh netbook, comes out even
By Nilay Patel 
posted February 3rd 2009 7:46PM
posted February 3rd 2009 7:46PM
[Thanks, Penny]
posted February 3rd 2009 7:46PM
powered by gdgt
Apple Mac OS X Lion
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
i realize that the iPhone isn't a full featured version of OSX, i'm just saying that Apple can bring the "Apple Experience" to an underpowered machine
Do you seriously think the iPhone is the apple experience? So, you want an iPhone with a 10-inch screen, and a keyboard? Oh great, AOE3 will be fun on that! (sarcasm)
@vvtopkarv: Jailbreak an iPhone or iPod Touch and you'll see that it IS a slimmed-down version of Mac OS X (compiled for ARM11 processors) that runs on these devices. You're right that Windows and Windows Mobile share nothing, but Mac OS X and the iPhone are a lot closer than you think.
so let me see if i get this, The net books are scaled down power computers of yesteryear. So it could be said that the performance of a net book vs hackentosh would say be about the same as a current hackentosh vs and equivalent mac. Didn't someone do benchmarks between a real mac and that one from pystar?
Anyway to make the point instead of a hackentosh if apple where to write there own optimized code for the instead of well hacking it to make it work, wouldn't one think that it would be safe to assume that the performance would be a little more on par with expectations?
correct me if I am wrong but the iPhone software is a scaled down version of mac os x. If OS X can run on a phone then there is no reason why apple can't scale it down to a netbook style laptop.
Not to be rude, but you're the second person to be wrong about this, look a few comments up.
OSX on the iPhone is not actually a mobile version of the OSX kernel. That's like saying Windows Mobile is a slimmed down version of the Windows Kernel. (Which is absolutely not right)
@vvtopkar: not to be rude, but look at the timestamps...
Maybe it's not the same kernel, but it's very similar: http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/07/13/iphone-os-x-architecture-the-mach-kernel-and-ram/
As it says right there on the link, it uses the same basic principles, unlike Windows Mobile that has a completely different one.
(Sorry for my English, non native speaker here xD)
"OSX on the iPhone is not actually a mobile version of the OSX kernel." - vvtopkar
Link please?
I have a 12" powerbook and its ridiculously heavy for its size. I'm positive it weighs about two times more than most netbooks.
So, wait. A 4 year old RISC chip running an OS optimized for the platform outperforms a generic modern low performance platform running the same OS? Get the fuck outta here.
The test I want to see would be similar tasks on a 400 MHz G3 with 512MB running OSX 10.4 and a Pentium III with a similar spec. running Vista Ultimate.
Now that would be a test.
I stuck to my P3450 Win2k up until 07 when I went MBP cause I couldn't be assed anymore with being a hacker just to do a days work.
DX2-66 200MMX P3450 all awesome.
Let's see a Vista Ultimate test on P3450
Another one would be NT4/2k vs vista ultimate on an atom netbook in a productivity battle.
I had the Mac setup you describe (as I imagine you do) up until a few months ago (got it dirt cheap from work) and although I've never tried it myself, I suspect that a P3 wouldn't even run Vista Ultimate. The G3 handled pretty well, but couldn't cope with video playback (just kept dropping frames, even with VLC). My main computer is a Vaio (dualbooting Vista Ultimate and OSX), but my experience with my now departed G3 leaves me with the opinion that OSX is far less resource hungry than Vista.
Find a 12" Powerbook G4? No thanks. The MSI Winds don't spontaneously MELT THE FUCK DOWN.
12 inch netbook?
Please...you must be kidding yourself with this article. Bump it up 1" to 13" and you can get a decently powered Macbook Air or new unibody Macbook. 12" netbook...... what a horribly good article.
OH BS. The macbook Air is a lot slower booting up than the MSI wind when both are running OSX.
Its due to the Air having a slow 1.8" pata drive.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=qU4AtYOSEFA
12-inch PowerBook G4 rocks.
oh yeah, baby !!
I don't believe it...
http://notebooksplanet.com/en
I have a iBook g4 and an acer aspire one running osx.
The ibook doesn't run avi or mpegs well at all. The hackintosh does. Basically the same specs. The netbook is better and smaller IMO. The only thing it lacks is apples design aesthetics and finish. But the iBooks look is dated anyway so no need to compare.
That is NOT the newer Nvidia powered Macbook Air.. The old one with the Intel GMA 950 sucks ass!
yes but its the one mac fans purchased...
For what I see in those graphics, the Wind is a better value. And its light, small and new! Also the screen is a lot more modern. I dont really understand why Engadget say its better to take the heavy old Ibook... After 4 years of use, the battery will be dead anyway.
And anyway, for the same weight as the Ibook G4, you can get a cheap 400$ dell laptop with way better spec than all those underpowered pancakes...
Really its totally irrelevant. Netbook are underpowered cause they are small and light. This is the "raison d'être" of the netbook category... you cant compare it to an ibook just like we dont compare cars with trucks.
And we knew since the first eee that the Atom cpu was similar in spec to an 1ghz G4... or at least people who used to frequent forum.eeeuser.com...
I'm writing this comment on a G4 PB 12". 867 MHz, 1GB of RAM, and a busted CD drive, and it's still more than functional as a "netbook". With the exception of flash, I can do everything I need to do on the web, plus use MS Office, iPhoto, etc. Netbook, schmetbook. OH, and it's never melted down, burst into flame, or any of that other crap.
@ nick
**With the exception of flash it can do everything on the....
wait a second - flash is everywhere..... dammit
^^ How your post should have read.....
No. Just no.
The reason OSX netbooks are slow in tests like this is that for the most part they are running whatever driver "will work". Unlike the G4s which were running the most tuned and mature drivers possible, given that Apple continued to tune them until the end. The netbook drivers for the most part are a complete crap shoot and performance can vary greatly from model to model depending on what individual components and chipsets are in each. One can expect netbook performance, especially on the more popular models, to get significantly better as people find/create better drivers.
i actually HAVE both these pieces of hardware. they do bench very similarly. but i can tell you that the user experience of osx running on the atom (with proper video drivers for core image acceleration) is significantly better than leopard chugging along on a g4 chip. there is a HUGE point that's brushed off in this disingenuous troll-bait piece:
"Sure, the Atom boots a bit faster and outperforms the G4 on simple tasks, but it slows way down when the going gets tough."
truth is, the little MSI wind *feels* so much better running osx. yes, boot times and simple tasks. that's 90% of what a netbook is supposed to do. if you want to crush gigaflops, get a real computer. but if you want to browse, email, write, play a flash game, watch hulu,etc, a 2.5lb hackintosh netbook rulez over a heavy, hard-drive-churning old g4.
stupid post. i expect better from you, engadget. or has your apple fanboyism turned the corner into propoganda?
Still have my old Ibook G4 and i'm pretty attached to it. Someone offered me $200 for it and I turned it down. The thing is built like a tank and has never had any issues at all. I upgraded it to Leopard and it runs a bit slower, but it's not too bad. Encoding video on this thing is not worth doing..at all. Not even simple MPEG-4.
I upgraded to 1.2GB of ram and even put in a 250gb or so hard drive. Talk about a pain. 40-50 screws and maybe 2 hours of time. Not fun at all. Thankfully Apple fixed this problem.
The Apple Ibook original hard drive is probably the slowest hard drive ever put into a machine in the last 5 years i'd imagine. It's a Toshiba 30gb.
Love the Ibook, but it doesn't play H.264 very well and a lot of videos skip and stutter. It's even the 1.2ghz version.
Only advantage most netbooks have is that they have a better video chipset and can play current games somewhat at low resolutions.
The Ibook is still somewhat heavy. Probably 5 or 6lbs, but i'm not sure.
The 12" PB max out at 1.25 GB RAM, compared to 2 GB for the MSI Wind.
A new Wind is cheaper than a 12" PB on EBay.
A 6-cell Wind will last longer on battery power than a 12" PB.
The Wind runs OS X very well actually, and has the same integrated GPU as the original MacBooks.
All that being said, I wouldn't pay over $350 for a 6-cell Wind, but I wouldn't pay over that for a 12" PB either. I'd wait a few months, then snag a used Wind on EBay for cheap.
And I just keep using my little white 12 inch ibook G4 with 1 1/2 gigs of ram. (their last model). I did stick a new HD in it, but otherwise it keeps working just fine. Admittedly, its just a travel computer for me, not my main box, but its working fine for now. I use a MacPro at home.
Minuses? Its heavy, it has no built in camera, its not Intel, so I have to use VirtualPC for windoze.
Frankly, I decided to keep using this, until Apple came out with a MUCH smaller and lighter laptop. Thats still my plan. I had an EeePc for a bit, but purchased the linux version. It was not for me, and I sold it on ebay. If Apple doesn't come out with something lighter, and smaller, I will most likely get another netbook, but with 7 or XP. I have very modest needs when traveling.
I don't think they will ignore this market for long, but I am not bettin on sub $500.
My EEE 900HA is the perfect hackintosh for me. It's the poor man's version for the Air :) I think it runs pretty snappy for netbook-related tasks (web browsing, im-ing, emailing, lite document editing).
900HA: 8.9", 2GB, 160GB, $325.
I just searched Ebay for a few weeks to get an iBook G4 for my dad, who's a complete computer noob.
When I discovered that these 4-year-old laptops are selling for $350 to over $500 (I expected $200...) I realized two things.
1. Try to get that for a 4-year-old PC laptop... (And these are iBooks! PowerBooks go for even more!)
2. Add a new battery and some RAM and you're looking at $600-$700. So thanks, but no thanks.
I bought a new MacBook instead and in 4 years I'll sell it for $500.
I had a G4 Powerbook for many years.
I now use a Wind running OS X as a portable machine. These benchmarks look wrong to me. In general use, the Wind feels about twice as fast. The Wind can even play 720p video, something the G4 could not do at all.
I think the blogger may have a badly configured hackintosh.
C.
xbench is not accurate at all. period.
I recently gave my 12" Aluminum Powerbook G4 to my mom. After 5 years it's still going strong (and was heavily used). Helps to have plenty of RAM and a new battery.
But I was running Leopard and using it as a netbook with no issues.
helloUser, only you are being ridiculous, precocious and abusive, which is why only you getting low-ranked :)
In fact, the 12" PowerBook G4 is a wonderful computer, one of the greatest things Apple ever made. Outstanding design, fully featured, great keyboard...
Of course it is rather slow by today's standards, and hopelessly outdated due to the PPC. Yet whether that matters depends on your needs. If you can pick a decent one up for a good price to do basic work on, you'll have a stonkin' great notebook. And as you see even its cheaper consumer brother can still keep up well with your latest and greatest plastic abomination. The PB is more powerful. So if you need the latest and greatest, or want to run Windows on your Mac, go pay through the nose for an Intel machine. But do not be condescending to other people's needs just because they differ from yours.
I really wish people would stop comparing full-sized notebooks of ANY kind or age to netbooks, eg. "Why would you buy a netbook when for $50 i can get a Dell xxxx with a 17" screen and blah blah blah..." That's not the fucking point! People buy netbooks because they want something that doesn't require a trailer to haul it around, and something that can fit in a backpack, purse or briefcase. The last time I checked, that didn't describe a 12" G4 MacBook or any other laptop from Apple (including the Air). A hackintosh Wind is a no-brainer as far as I'm concerned.
A fraction of a percent? Check your facts.
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/gaming/xbox-360-failure-rate-30-says-retailers-271487.php
How about 30% of XBOX360s. That's unacceptable.
I know I'm way late on thing (I've been behind with all my RSS) but I still need to comment because there was a short time last year when my aging iBook G4 was replaced by my MSI Wind hackintosh.
Now first of all we're comparing two very different things. Let me list these first:
My iBook got around 2:20 on a GOOD charge, and had a TFT display (not very bright). /
My Wind has gotten 5:20 on a charge a few times, and it had an LED backlight that even at it's Lowest setting is still about the same as the highest setting on the iBook.
The iBook was about a half inch thicker and weighs 2 pounds more. The screen is slightly larger but without about the same pixel depth.
My iBook was at the max 1 gig of RAM, whereas my Wind is at it's max of 2gigs. (point: higher capability)
iBook came with a 40gig 4200rpm HDD. Wind came with 5400rpm 60gig, but I've upgraded it to an 80gig 7200rpm. Anything above 5400rpm wasn't supported on the G4 and significantly lowered battery life, where the Wind still got over 5 hours battery life one a 7200rpm.
My Wind has a software overclock that bumps it up to 1.86GHz. It works in XP, Win7 and OSX. This number isn't tested in the listed benchmarks.
And, very importantly, it runs Windows both as a partition and as a virtual machine.
Other Wind benefits over iBook: SD reader that works in OSX; built-in webcam; an extra USB port (3 total); and wireless N wifi.
And all in all, the Wind is faster at EVERYTHING. It's a very clear difference. And if you look at the benchmarks almost all of them have the Wind ahead, sometimes by double. Saying it's even isn't quite accurate.
But, all those advantages said I should also mentioned that I sold the iBook on Craiglist to a happy buyer for $460 and with all my modifications (N card, RAM, HDD) my Wind cost $410.
And it still outperforms the G4 even when running XP in a VM.
So, just saying. That's my experience. I'm very happy with my MSI Wind.
Old doesn't mean busted, neccessarily...
import video to imovie, dvd to imovie
http://www.mp4kits.com/Converter/iMovie/
I have had many netbooks, Toshiba NB100, Asus 701 901 etc etc
Find them very slow.
I have just got last saturday a late 2004 G4 iBook 1.33ghz with 14" 32mb radeon 9200 and dvdrw and wifi extreme and bluetooth.. battery is like new and good for around 2-4 hours depending on screen brightness.
Only cost £189 from A computer Market in Manchester
Yes its bigger and heavy but it does what i want and runs 10.5.6 ok with 1gb ram
I have a 11.1" Philips freevents 1.06 core duo with dvd rewriter and this was secondhand and still was only £240.00 plus £25 to re'cell the battery to like new.
And its only 1.6kg which is only 400grams more than the very very slow atom cpu netbooks and i still get 3-4 hours battery life and with its built in dvd rewiter plus firewire etc beats any netbook.